Channel 4 Documentary

Fascinating. Hopefully Paul's fears about the documentary are misplaced.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/11030692/Recreating-Richard-III-Channel-4s-New-Evidence.html

Jonathan

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad

It was a really interesting programme, and I thought blew the whole "hunchback" thing out of the water.
Clothed, the young man with the scolliosis looked fine, and his disability was barely, if at all, noticeable.
Which is what we have been saying here, and is also the view of UoL.
It seems to me that the first the population of England would have known of it was the moment Richard was thrown naked over a horse.

As far as the diet is concerned, probably Richard would have had the same team of cooks to provide his meals as Edward IV did, so they probably just kept the menus as before.
Also the wine thing, wasn't it customary to have wine with breakfast in those days?
A couple of glasses with breakfast, and a couple with supper, and that's the bottle gone with little sign of inebriation at all.

Sounds nearer the truth to me than that he had become "dissolute."

But hey, I'm a Ricardian!

Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

I won't dwell on this at length for now, but in spite of the usual 'why
didn't they have a Ricardian expert along to ask questions and point out
the inaccuracies, of which this time there were I am pleased to report, few.
Best thing of all was the young man with the same spinal curvature as
Richard, almost identical in fact, doing everything they threw at him
well, in spite of not having anything like the level of fitness Richard
had, not training since his early teens, nor experience of riding a
horse everywhere from the age he could walk. He summed it up in a very
positive way, saying that he now realised that in spite of his condition
he could do things that a lot of fit young people couldn't do.
Oh Richard started drinking more when he became king, which quite
frankly I can't blame him . But I don't think a bottle of wine a day,
possibly watered down some of the time, could be seen as excessive, even
today.
More tomorrow, but on the whole, the programme has to be welcomed.
Paul

--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Jessie wrote

"Also the wine thing, wasn't it customary to have wine with breakfast in those days?A couple of glasses with breakfast, and a couple with supper, and that's the bottle gone with little sign of inebriation at all.

Sounds nearer the truth to me than that he had become "dissolute." "

Marie responds:

I can see this 'dissolute' and 'fat and unfit' nonsense becoming a new Richard III myth. With regard to the diet, as far as I understood what the scientist was saying, she just said his diet had shifted more towards high-quality animal proteins like wild fowl and freshwater fish - if the Channel 4 people think that would make you fat they can't have tried out the Dukan diet. Von Poppelau found Richard hardly touched his food when he joined him at table, and he was thin at that time, and all sources seem agreed that he was still a very slightly built individual at the time of his death. And I did think it was pretty silly to wheel out Richard's coronation menu as evidence of his personal eating habits.

The increase in wine intake is interesting though, isn't it? Obviously if you're drinking dilute wine all day as your main source of fluid getting through a bottleful is going to be quite easy. I do expect Richard enjoyed having access to more fine wine - there's a lovely letter in Harley 433 from Richard to Louis XI asking him to let Blanc Sanglier herald, after he's delivered his official correspondence to Louis, go on to Haute France to pick up some wines for Richard and his dearest consort the Queen. Maybe Bishop Langton's remark about the court becoming increasingly given over to sensuality as 1483 drew on had something to do with the array of fine foods and wines on offer at the top tables.

Also, it's quite possible he upped his alcohol consumption later in the reign to drown his sorrows.

Jessie wrote

"Also the wine thing, wasn't it customary to have wine with breakfast in those days?A couple of glasses with breakfast, and a couple with supper, and that's the bottle gone with little sign of inebriation at all.

Sounds nearer the truth to me than that he had become "dissolute." "

Marie responds:

I can see this 'dissolute' and 'fat and unfit' nonsense becoming a new Richard III myth. With regard to the diet, as far as I understood what the scientist was saying, she just said his diet had shifted more towards high-quality animal proteins like wild fowl and freshwater fish - if the Channel 4 people think that would make you fat they can't have tried out the Dukan diet. Von Poppelau found Richard hardly touched his food when he joined him at table, and he was thin at that time, and all sources seem agreed that he was still a very slightly built individual at the time of his death. And I did think it was pretty silly to wheel out Richard's coronation menu as evidence of his personal eating habits.

The increase in wine intake is interesting though, isn't it? Obviously if you're drinking dilute wine all day as your main source of fluid getting through a bottleful is going to be quite easy. I do expect Richard enjoyed having access to more fine wine - there's a lovely letter in Harley 433 from Richard to Louis XI asking him to let Blanc Sanglier herald, after he's delivered his official correspondence to Louis, go on to Haute France to pick up some wines for Richard and his dearest consort the Queen. Maybe Bishop Langton's remark about the court becoming increasingly given over to sensuality as 1483 drew on had something to do with the array of fine foods and wines on offer at the top tables.

Also, it's quite possible he upped his alcohol consumption later in the reign to drown his sorrows.

Agreed with everything you said Sandra.. I have always believe that the whole population walked around slightly inebriated due to everyone was drinking ale all day long and the upper classes a gets deal of wine...Wrong...I read this interesting little snippet yesterday,,'Beer and wine were very weak with an alcoholic content just a fraction of modern products because the specially bred yeasts which allow more advanced fermentation had not been developed and neither had the advanced brewing techniques. Most people would drink large quantities of small beer and think of that as ginger beer and you won't go far wrong in assessing the amount of alcohol content...' As to Richard being a glutton..which means vastly over eating more than you need...well his very slender frame tells us that although the foods were available he didn't over indulge..maybe he had learned a lesson from the example of his brother who was I believe was obese... Eileen

I'll start my nit picking with the use of the word "seized" when
describing how Richard became king. he was offered the crown under
extraordinary circumstances.
This is why I wish they had had someone like me around, who knows
Richard's whole story and could ask questions, or guide the programme
makers in what to ask, plus correct any mistakes, or misunderstandings.
As has already been mentioned Richard's training from the age of around
10 in Warwick's household was only briefly mentioned, and nobody stated
that he had been brought up on horseback from probably the same age as
he learned to walk. Horse riding is a great form of exercise! Have to
agree about the use of the medieval saddle and the support it gave to
the rider, no matter what the rider's back was like!
I would have appreciated knowing at what age the scoliosis developed in
both Dominic and Richard. Had it been in the late teens that surely
would have made a big difference.
One also missed the mention of the fact that young Dominic did not look
to be particularly healthy, and his lifestyle was not referred to at
all, except that he was unemployed and living at home with his mother.
What's his diet like? Does he drink? What exercise does he do, if any?
Dom got short of breath after some exercise, but again, he had not had
the training from the young age Richard had.
Stating the evidence that Richard could wear armour was inconclusive?
Ridiculous! The programme makers talked as if Bosworth was the first
battle Richard fought in. Mention of his career as Constable of England,
and a general at both Barnet and Tewkesbury, well documented, would have
been welcome to put Richard's life in context.
I also remember reading somewhere of the story that he wore the same
armour at Bosworth that he wore at Tewkesbury. Of course, most probably
a tale, but it speaks to his physicality, and that there was little
difference in his body shape between 1471 from 1485.
Von Poppelau wrote of Richard's physical appearance, and how he ate
little. Had he also been drinking a lot, this would have been commented
on. And as I said in my earlier post, a bottle of wine a day is not a
lot, especially if watered down, which it probably was, and considering
the personal tragedy he experienced in 1484, added to the stress of
being monarch, I don't blame him for increasing his intake, if in fact
he did.
Finally, why keep showing Olivier, and why give Shakespeare the credit
of "knowing" that Richard was "deformed"? Not "deformed" folks, he had
scoliosis, which Dom dressed showed was not noticeable in T shirt and
jeans, so imagine how Richard appeared to his people, in velvets and
furs, or in armour? The Bard said he was a evil hunchback with a
withered arm. Fiction, along with most of the crimes Shakespeare decided
to accuse him of to draw attention away from the crimes of the Tudors he
was writing for!

--
Richard Liveth Yet!

I agree with your nit picking, Paul. Sandra =^..^= From: mailto: Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 10:40 AM To: Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

I'll start my nit picking with the use of the word "seized" when
describing how Richard became king. he was offered the crown under
extraordinary circumstances.
This is why I wish they had had someone like me around, who knows
Richard's whole story and could ask questions, or guide the programme
makers in what to ask, plus correct any mistakes, or misunderstandings.
As has already been mentioned Richard's training from the age of around
10 in Warwick's household was only briefly mentioned, and nobody stated
that he had been brought up on horseback from probably the same age as
he learned to walk. Horse riding is a great form of exercise! Have to
agree about the use of the medieval saddle and the support it gave to
the rider, no matter what the rider's back was like!
I would have appreciated knowing at what age the scoliosis developed in
both Dominic and Richard. Had it been in the late teens that surely
would have made a big difference.
One also missed the mention of the fact that young Dominic did not look
to be particularly healthy, and his lifestyle was not referred to at
all, except that he was unemployed and living at home with his mother.
What's his diet like? Does he drink? What exercise does he do, if any?
Dom got short of breath after some exercise, but again, he had not had
the training from the young age Richard had.
Stating the evidence that Richard could wear armour was inconclusive?
Ridiculous! The programme makers talked as if Bosworth was the first
battle Richard fought in. Mention of his career as Constable of England,
and a general at both Barnet and Tewkesbury, well documented, would have
been welcome to put Richard's life in context.
I also remember reading somewhere of the story that he wore the same
armour at Bosworth that he wore at Tewkesbury. Of course, most probably
a tale, but it speaks to his physicality, and that there was little
difference in his body shape between 1471 from 1485.
Von Poppelau wrote of Richard's physical appearance, and how he ate
little. Had he also been drinking a lot, this would have been commented
on. And as I said in my earlier post, a bottle of wine a day is not a
lot, especially if watered down, which it probably was, and considering
the personal tragedy he experienced in 1484, added to the stress of
being monarch, I don't blame him for increasing his intake, if in fact
he did.
Finally, why keep showing Olivier, and why give Shakespeare the credit
of "knowing" that Richard was "deformed"? Not "deformed" folks, he had
scoliosis, which Dom dressed showed was not noticeable in T shirt and
jeans, so imagine how Richard appeared to his people, in velvets and
furs, or in armour? The Bard said he was a evil hunchback with a
withered arm. Fiction, along with most of the crimes Shakespeare decided
to accuse him of to draw attention away from the crimes of the Tudors he
was writing for!

--
Richard Liveth Yet!

I have recently completed the University of Leicester on line course on "Life in the Time of Richard III," and very good it was too.
So I feel sure that Richard's diet was no surprise to them. In the excellent module on food and drink it was pointed out that due to the shortage of labour following "The Black Death" peasants and other non aristocrats were able to earn much higher rates of pay. This meant that they were able to greatly improve their diets and they were able to afford beef, pork and lamb.
In order to delineate themselves from the poorer people, royalty and the upper classes ate obscure and less easy to access meats and fish in order to proclaim their "difference" and their wealth.
Egret may or may not taste good, but it displays wealth if one is able to afford it.

This would easily account for Richard's diet as king.
The menus available for banquets are quite instructive in this, and as the king he would have attended many of these functions, where his own personal choice of foodstuffs were really not relevant.
It was more to do with making a display of power and wealth.

We might agree and disagree here about the merits of the various portraits available of Richard, but in none of them is he shown as anything but very slim and fine boned, so I think we can discount gluttony as one of his vices.
Also he was a very active man so probably burned off quite a number of calories every day.
I suspect that his diet was one that was typical for a monarch at that time.
It would be instructive to be able to analyse another king at that time in order to have a comparison.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Jessie wrote

"Also the wine thing, wasn't it customary to have wine with breakfast in those days?A couple of glasses with breakfast, and a couple with supper, and that's the bottle gone with little sign of inebriation at all.

Sounds nearer the truth to me than that he had become "dissolute." "

Marie responds:

I can see this 'dissolute' and 'fat and unfit' nonsense becoming a new Richard III myth. With regard to the diet, as far as I understood what the scientist was saying, she just said his diet had shifted more towards high-quality animal proteins like wild fowl and freshwater fish - if the Channel 4 people think that would make you fat they can't have tried out the Dukan diet. Von Poppelau found Richard hardly touched his food when he joined him at table, and he was thin at that time, and all sources seem agreed that he was still a very slightly built individual at the time of his death. And I did think it was pretty silly to wheel out Richard's coronation menu as evidence of his personal eating habits.

The increase in wine intake is interesting though, isn't it? Obviously if you're drinking dilute wine all day as your main source of fluid getting through a bottleful is going to be quite easy. I do expect Richard enjoyed having access to more fine wine - there's a lovely letter in Harley 433 from Richard to Louis XI asking him to let Blanc Sanglier herald, after he's delivered his official correspondence to Louis, go on to Haute France to pick up some wines for Richard and his dearest consort the Queen. Maybe Bishop Langton's remark about the court becoming increasingly given over to sensuality as 1483 drew on had something to do with the array of fine foods and wines on offer at the top tables.

Also, it's quite possible he upped his alcohol consumption later in the reign to drown his sorrows.

<chuckle>

Sandra, you have such a way with words! :-D

Of course I couldn’t see the doco over here in North America. Does anyone have any idea when it will be available here either on TV or on YouTube?

Looking forward to it – it sounds like with the reenactments of young Dominic that they performed a real service. But I do agree that fear of being dull may have influenced them in going for the dissolute factor.

TTFN J

Johanne

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

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

Johanne L. Tournier

Email - jltournier60@...

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

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

From: [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 5:17 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

I’d like to see our present queen sitting at a banquet and chomping her way through the lot! And surely, if Richard was half-cut all the time, when everyone else wasn’t, someone, somewhere might have made a teensy note? I’m certain our ‘Enery (for one) wouldn’t have missed such a handy stick with which to beat his predecessor. The programme kept insisting that Richard’s diet was far, far richer than those of his peers and contemporaries. How do they know? How many other kings’ bones have they ground up to find out? I’m prepared to believe that Richard’s food was much richer once he became king, but the drinking bit is iffy to say the least. And he didn’t sit at those banquets alone, so presumably everyone around him was chomping and slurping as well? So, no, I think Channel Four are trying to cause a little controversy. After all, the programme shows that Richard could certainly do everything he is recorded as having done. That might equal ‘boring’ in TV-speak. So let’s home in on something else to crank up the hype. Ah yes – he was a lush! And he had worms. Mustn’t forget the worms. Always good for the shudder factor.

Otherwise, I enjoyed it all. And nothing has shaken my loyalty or admiration for King Richard III. Adversity struck him on all sides in his health and private life, but still he was a remarkable king, whose Parliament did so very much for his people. Slight, drunk, suffering from indigestion due to gorging on over-rich food at breakfast, he still came within a few feet of giving Henry the Jelly a fatal dent to the helm. No wonder said Henry made sure to never again be on a battlefield. He must have bricked it big time when he watched Richard hacking his way toward him.

So well done, Dominic. I think we now have a much more accurate idea of what Richard actually looked like, gracile arms and all. And Dominic now feels much more confident in himself, so while he did a favour for Richard, Richard has returned that favour. Good luck, Dominic, may your fortunes improve now on. We all wish you well.

Sandra

=^..^=

A very good observation, Jonathan.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

It's probably a difficult one to answer by generalising, which is perhaps why they didn't go down that route.  Certainly, stress can create symptoms (I developed a swallowing disorder which I'm convinced was directly related to dealing with my mother's dementia), and tension in muscle groups can have all kinds of adverse effects.  But without knowing how Richard handled stress, it's pure speculation.
As for whether the scoliosis impacted on Richard at Barnet and Tewkesbury, being idiopathic it may not have been so pronounced then.  But, even if it was, fighting side-by-side with others isn't quite the same as being isolated and assailed on all sides. No matter how fit and strong you are, if your lung capacity is impaired you'll begin to tire fast in that most extreme of life or death situations.  Which might explain how one or more of his assailants were able to get close enough to cut his chin straps and wrest off his helmet...

Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 18 August 2014, 15:53
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

  Yes I submit that, had it not been for that Amy Licence wine moment at the very, very end I thought it was really excellent. One question they didn't ask was whether scoliosis breathing difficulties and pain were exacerbated by stress. That could certainly tell us something about how/why Richard reacted to Hastings and whether indeed he did believe someone at that point was trying to make him ill.  Am I right in thinking that a lot of Barnet and Tewkesbury was fought on foot (certainly by Warwick, Montague and Edward)? But Richard would have been younger then. H

I did a bit of googling and discovered that the inevitable scholarly paper on the subject of the analysis of Richard's bone tissue went online on Saturday. The link is here.

Multi-isotope analysis demonstrates significant lifestyle changes in King Richard III

It's very interesting as it also discusses Richard's whereabouts during various stages of his childhood and adolescence. Perhaps we can discuss tomorrow?

Marie

I did a bit of googling and discovered that the inevitable scholarly paper on the subject of the analysis of Richard's bone tissue went online on Saturday. The link is hern the report. e.

Multi-isotope analysis demonstrates significant lifestyle changes in King Richard III

It's very interesting as it also discusses Richard's whereabouts during various stages of his childhood and adolescence. Perhaps we can discuss tomorrow?

Marie

Marie, thank you for the link. This is fascinating, and well over my meager knowledge of the tests, concentrations, etc. But, it was very interesting, and with only a brief brush of controversial. If only other bones could be tested...... From contemporaries, as well as the following Tudors.
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:38 PM, "mariewalsh2003" <[email protected]> wrote:

I did a bit of googling and discovered that the inevitable scholarly paper on the subject of the analysis of Richard's bone tissue went online on Saturday. The link is hern the report. e.

Multi-isotope analysis demonstrates significant lifestyle changes in King Richard III

It's very interesting as it also discusses Richard's whereabouts during various stages of his childhood and adolescence. Perhaps we can discuss tomorrow?

Marie

Don't think you've fought in many medieval battle Jonathan! :-)
Richard was wounded at Barnet, where, as at Tewkesbury, he was surrounded by household squires and possibly knights. It is well known that in numerous battles, the fighters would take a break to get some air and get back their stamina, after cooking in their armour for an hour or so! Richard being wounded would mean he would have been able to get his breath back while his squires attended to his wound and protected his back while doing so. He was also able to move back slightly while this happened, as would other knights in similar circumstances.
Had Richard not been fit and well thought of as a warrior, King Edward would not have trusted his brother with such an important role in either battle.
Bosworth and being surrounded by Stanley traitors was of course very different.
Paul


On 18/08/2014 17:04, Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... [] wrote:
It's probably a difficult one to answer by generalising, which is perhaps why they didn't go down that route. Certainly, stress can create symptoms (I developed a swallowing disorder which I'm convinced was directly related to dealing with my mother's dementia), and tension in muscle groups can have all kinds of adverse effects. But without knowing how Richard handled stress, it's pure speculation.
As for whether the scoliosis impacted on Richard at Barnet and Tewkesbury, being idiopathic it may not have been so pronounced then. But, even if it was, fighting side-by-side with others isn't quite the same as being isolated and assailed on all sides. No matter how fit and strong you are, if your lung capacity is impaired you'll begin to tire fast in that most extreme of life or death situations. Which might explain how one or more of his assailants were able to get close enough to cut his chin straps and wrest off his helmet...

Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Monday, 18 August 2014, 15:53
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Yes I submit that, had it not been for that Amy Licence wine moment at the very, very end I thought it was really excellent. One question they didn't ask was whether scoliosis breathing difficulties and pain were exacerbated by stress. That could certainly tell us something about how/why Richard reacted to Hastings and whether indeed he did believe someone at that point was trying to make him ill. Am I right in thinking that a lot of Barnet and Tewkesbury was fought on foot (certainly by Warwick, Montague and Edward)? But Richard would have been younger then. H



--
Richard Liveth Yet!

I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

Jonathan, in the programme it was inferred and only inferred (not actually said) that Richard was killed and therefore lost Bosworth because he was weaker when fighting on foot than when on horseback. What I was saying (and I think Paul also?) was that he would have lost anyway, because it was also to do with backup, which he had at Barnet and Tewkesbury when he fought perfectly well on foot, and which he didn't have at Bosworth because he was outnumbered, let down by the Stanleys. And what I think Paul and I were both were saying is that Edward wouldn't have given him a crucial command at Barnet and Tewkesbury if he was in any way a risk because of his health. I began this all by asking whether he did in fact fight on foot at the earlier battles because, if he did it proves, with backup and breaks (which they had) it wasn't such a big issue as was made out in the programme. The issue was Stanley's treachery and his isolation. H Hope this helps? H

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 12:24, "Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... []" <> wrote:


But Hilary, in what way would Edward have been taking a risk? No one's said that. And, yes, it was the isolation at Bosworth that was significant (see my previous message). Armour's not hugely difficult to move around in. It weighs about the same as a modern soldier's pack, with the advantage that that weight is spread evenly over the body. I'm really not sure what this discussion's about.
Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 11:28
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

That's the point I was trying (though rather awkwardly) to make Paul. Edward would never have taken such a risk; and I don't mean just through sentiment. It was surely the isolation at Bosworth once Stanley failed to back up the charge. Had Richard even been super fit I doubt whether in such circumstances he would have survived, particularly in the hands of foreign mercenaries. Isn't there also a myth about armour being difficult to move round in on foot and that in fact it was nowhere near as heavy as people have come to believe, but as you say very stifling? H

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 9:53, "Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []" <> wrote:


Don't think you've fought in many medieval battle Jonathan! :-)
Richard was wounded at Barnet, where, as at Tewkesbury, he was surrounded by household squires and possibly knights. It is well known that in numerous battles, the fighters would take a break to get some air and get back their stamina, after cooking in their armour for an hour or so! Richard being wounded would mean he would have been able to get his breath back while his squires attended to his wound and protected his back while doing so. He was also able to move back slightly while this happened, as would other knights in similar circumstances.
Had Richard not been fit and well thought of as a warrior, King Edward would not have trusted his brother with such an important role in either battle.
Bosworth and being surrounded by Stanley traitors was of course very different.
Paul


On 18/08/2014 17:04, Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... [] wrote:


It's probably a difficult one to answer by generalising, which is perhaps why they didn't go down that route. Certainly, stress can create symptoms (I developed a swallowing disorder which I'm convinced was directly related to dealing with my mother's dementia), and tension in muscle groups can have all kinds of adverse effects. But without knowing how Richard handled stress, it's pure speculation.
As for whether the scoliosis impacted on Richard at Barnet and Tewkesbury, being idiopathic it may not have been so pronounced then. But, even if it was, fighting side-by-side with others isn't quite the same as being isolated and assailed on all sides. No matter how fit and strong you are, if your lung capacity is impaired you'll begin to tire fast in that most extreme of life or death situations. Which might explain how one or more of his assailants were able to get close enough to cut his chin straps and wrest off his helmet...

Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" mailto:
To: mailto: mailto:
Sent: Monday, 18 August 2014, 15:53
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Yes I submit that, had it not been for that Amy Licence wine moment at the very, very end I thought it was really excellent. One question they didn't ask was whether scoliosis breathing difficulties and pain were exacerbated by stress. That could certainly tell us something about how/why Richard reacted to Hastings and whether indeed he did believe someone at that point was trying to make him ill. Am I right in thinking that a lot of Barnet and Tewkesbury was fought on foot (certainly by Warwick, Montague and Edward)? But Richard would have been younger then. H



--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Posted by: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> Reply via web post " Reply to sender " Reply to group " Start a New Topic " Messages in this topic (35)
[The entire original message is not included.]

Well - if there were witnesses to the black teeth I think we're only pretty safe ground. Or of course it could be too much red wine? H :) :)

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 15:53, "'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... []" <> wrote:


Hey Hilary, if it's right that HT's teeth were black, I think we can conclude that he certainly enjoyed sweet things! Or would that be drawing a totally out-of-order conclusion? From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:47 PM To: Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

Both, Hilary! Of a certainty. HT was a lush and a bon-vivant, never sober, always with a sticky bun in his hand. It must be so, because his isotopes prove it. Well, they would if we knew them. I'm sure he would never have permitted Richard to live a finer life than he did, so he'd eat and drink to even greater excess. It stands to reason. Well, Channel Four reason anyway. From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:09 PM To: Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Well - if there were witnesses to the black teeth I think we're only pretty safe ground. Or of course it could be too much red wine? H :) :)

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 15:53, "'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... []" <> wrote:


Hey Hilary, if it's right that HT's teeth were black, I think we can conclude that he certainly enjoyed sweet things! Or would that be drawing a totally out-of-order conclusion? From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:47 PM To: Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

Just to explain my earlier comments, I wasn't even trying to suggest that Richard lost the Battle of Bosworth because of his scolliosis, just that given the forces ranged against him, that it wouldn't have helped.
I am in awe of what he achieved physically in spite of his disability, maybe because I taught students with disabilities, and was also disabled myself until a couple of years ago, when I had the tibia and knee I had smashed to smithereens, almost literally, in a hiking accident, replaced and rebuilt by a wonderful surgeon.
I am now restored to health, but it doesn't stop me recognising the many achievements that Richard, and many others have made over disability.

JessFrom: Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []
Sent: 19/08/2014 15:42
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Jonathan, in the programme it was inferred and only inferred (not actually said) that Richard was killed and therefore lost Bosworth because he was weaker when fighting on foot than when on horseback. What I was saying (and I think Paul also?) was that he would have lost anyway, because it was also to do with backup, which he had at Barnet and Tewkesbury when he fought perfectly well on foot, and which he didn't have at Bosworth because he was outnumbered, let down by the Stanleys. And what I think Paul and I were both were saying is that Edward wouldn't have given him a crucial command at Barnet and Tewkesbury if he was in any way a risk because of his health. I began this all by asking whether he did in fact fight on foot at the earlier battles because, if he did it proves, with backup and breaks (which they had) it wasn't such a big issue as was made out in the programme. The issue was Stanley's treachery and his isolation. H Hope this helps? H

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 12:24, "Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... []" <> wrote:


But Hilary, in what way would Edward have been taking a risk? No one's said that. And, yes, it was the isolation at Bosworth that was significant (see my previous message). Armour's not hugely difficult to move around in. It weighs about the same as a modern soldier's pack, with the advantage that that weight is spread evenly over the body. I'm really not sure what this discussion's about.
Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" <>
To: "" <>
Sent: Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 11:28
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

That's the point I was trying (though rather awkwardly) to make Paul. Edward would never have taken such a risk; and I don't mean just through sentiment. It was surely the isolation at Bosworth once Stanley failed to back up the charge. Had Richard even been super fit I doubt whether in such circumstances he would have survived, particularly in the hands of foreign mercenaries. Isn't there also a myth about armour being difficult to move round in on foot and that in fact it was nowhere near as heavy as people have come to believe, but as you say very stifling? H

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 9:53, "Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []" <> wrote:


Don't think you've fought in many medieval battle Jonathan! :-)
Richard was wounded at Barnet, where, as at Tewkesbury, he was surrounded by household squires and possibly knights. It is well known that in numerous battles, the fighters would take a break to get some air and get back their stamina, after cooking in their armour for an hour or so! Richard being wounded would mean he would have been able to get his breath back while his squires attended to his wound and protected his back while doing so. He was also able to move back slightly while this happened, as would other knights in similar circumstances.
Had Richard not been fit and well thought of as a warrior, King Edward would not have trusted his brother with such an important role in either battle.
Bosworth and being surrounded by Stanley traitors was of course very different.
Paul


On 18/08/2014 17:04, Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... [] wrote:


It's probably a difficult one to answer by generalising, which is perhaps why they didn't go down that route. Certainly, stress can create symptoms (I developed a swallowing disorder which I'm convinced was directly related to dealing with my mother's dementia), and tension in muscle groups can have all kinds of adverse effects. But without knowing how Richard handled stress, it's pure speculation.
As for whether the scoliosis impacted on Richard at Barnet and Tewkesbury, being idiopathic it may not have been so pronounced then. But, even if it was, fighting side-by-side with others isn't quite the same as being isolated and assailed on all sides. No matter how fit and strong you are, if your lung capacity is impaired you'll begin to tire fast in that most extreme of life or death situations. Which might explain how one or more of his assailants were able to get close enough to cut his chin straps and wrest off his helmet...

Jonathan

From: "Hilary Jones hjnatdat@... []" mailto:
To: mailto: mailto:
Sent: Monday, 18 August 2014, 15:53
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Yes I submit that, had it not been for that Amy Licence wine moment at the very, very end I thought it was really excellent. One question they didn't ask was whether scoliosis breathing difficulties and pain were exacerbated by stress. That could certainly tell us something about how/why Richard reacted to Hastings and whether indeed he did believe someone at that point was trying to make him ill. Am I right in thinking that a lot of Barnet and Tewkesbury was fought on foot (certainly by Warwick, Montague and Edward)? But Richard would have been younger then. H



--
Richard Liveth Yet!

Pos
[The entire original message is not included.]

Dig him up. Dig him up!

Jess From: mailto:
Sent: 19/08/2014 16:23
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Both, Hilary! Of a certainty. HT was a lush and a bon-vivant, never sober, always with a sticky bun in his hand. It must be so, because his isotopes prove it. Well, they would if we knew them. I'm sure he would never have permitted Richard to live a finer life than he did, so he'd eat and drink to even greater excess. It stands to reason. Well, Channel Four reason anyway. From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:09 PM To: Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Well - if there were witnesses to the black teeth I think we're only pretty safe ground. Or of course it could be too much red wine? H :) :)

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 15:53, "'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... []" <> wrote:


Hey Hilary, if it's right that HT's teeth were black, I think we can conclude that he certainly enjoyed sweet things! Or would that be drawing a totally out-of-order conclusion? From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:47 PM To: Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

Hey Hilary, if it's right that HT's teeth were black, I think we can conclude that he certainly enjoyed sweet things! Or would that be drawing a totally out-of-order conclusion? From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:47 PM To: Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

Love it, Sandra, just love it!

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

I have one of Time Team's JCBs at the ready, Jess. It's just a question of getting it through the porch at Westminster Abbey. I'll keep you posted. Sandra =^..^= From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:31 PM To: Subject: RE: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Dig him up. Dig him up!

Jess From: mailto:
Sent: 19/08/2014 16:23
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Both, Hilary! Of a certainty. HT was a lush and a bon-vivant, never sober, always with a sticky bun in his hand. It must be so, because his isotopes prove it. Well, they would if we knew them. I'm sure he would never have permitted Richard to live a finer life than he did, so he'd eat and drink to even greater excess. It stands to reason. Well, Channel Four reason anyway. From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 4:09 PM To: Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Well - if there were witnesses to the black teeth I think we're only pretty safe ground. Or of course it could be too much red wine? H :) :)

On Tuesday, 19 August 2014, 15:53, "'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... []" <> wrote:


Hey Hilary, if it's right that HT's teeth were black, I think we can conclude that he certainly enjoyed sweet things! Or would that be drawing a totally out-of-order conclusion? From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:47 PM To: Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary I enjoyed this paper, so thanks very much Marie. It's thorough and well-reasoned, as one would expect. It's amazing how the media needs to pick out the slightest thing to sensationalise it. To be fair, when you look at Richard pre Edward's death he was rushed around by Edward so much that I doubt he had much time to enjoy the finer things. Life on the Scottish border could not have been that great. I wickedly wish they would exhume HT and do a comparison. According to Penn, he enjoyed a good celebration. H

They might notice the sledgehammer.......

Don't forget the can opener either......it will be similar to wresting with a very large tin of sardines....I'm not comparing 'Enery with a sardine..oh no... I'm just saying the lead encasing him could prove tricky....

A blow-torch perchance, Eileen? I'm sure I could get on with it without anyone giving me a second glance. Especially if I pinch a nice flashy cope and a mitre. From: mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 5:28 PM To: Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Don't forget the can opener either......it will be similar to wresting with a very large tin of sardines....I'm not comparing 'Enery with a sardine..oh no... I'm just saying the lead encasing him could prove tricky....

Don't forget the can opener either......it will be similar to wresting with a very large tin of sardines....I'm not comparing 'Enery with a sardine..oh no... I'm just saying the lead encasing him could prove tricky....

Durotrige48 wrote:

"His oxygen isotope values also rise towards the end of his life and as we know he did not relocate during this time, we suggest the changes could be brought about by increased wine consumption." However if "towards the end of his life" means 1483/5 then Richards re-location from Yorkshire to London could affect the equation. It may also be that more exotic foods and wines would have been available in the Capital than would generally be easily available in Middleham, Sheriff Hutton or Pontefract?"

Marie:

I/ve finally struggled through the paper once - can't pretend to have totally taken it in, but with the Oxygen isotope 18 O, which is the one that has led to the boozing theory, what I understand they're saying is that this is affected by a person's fluid intake rather than their food, and that normally levels are higher in people living in areas of higher rainfall; in England the east side of the country is relatively dry, and the west side relatively wet.. Hence Richard's levels of 18 O rose around age 5 when he transferred from Fotheringhay in the East Midlands to Ludlow on the Welsh borders. The argument is that, although he did relocate after becoming king, it was southwards rather than westwards and therefore should not have resulted in increased levels of 18 O.

In order to explain this anomaly, the authors suggest increased alcohol intake. They say this would certainly do it, but admit that 18 O isotope levels have never before been used to assess alcohol consumption! I'd be much more convinced if this claim had come with a background of work on the bones of individuals known to have had an alcohol problem rather than being simply a theoretical notion.

The authors have built on previous work using changes in 18 O levels to indicate migration of individuals from one area to another, but they don't explain is whether *periods* of increased rainfall would cause a rise in the 18 O levels of individuals who have remained living in the same place - it would be nice if we could ask that question. We know the autumn of 1483 was extraordinarily wet, and I note from the Burgundian grape harvest data ( ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/historical/france/burgundy2004.txt) that the harvest was very late in 1481 and 1485, which suggests cooler weather. The Annals of Ulster also records that there was a particularly abundant and juicy apple harvest in 1485 - a sign of a wet summer. Does anyone know of any contemporary references to the weather during Richard's reign?

I know that beyond the autumn flooding of 1483 there were ideal grape-growing conditions in France in both 1483 and 84 - there were two grape harvests in 1484, as there was a period of great heat after the first harvest (early June?). Also it was recorded that 1486 was apparently a year of famine in England (Cornelius Walford) so that may indicate poor weather conditions in summer1485.

Hi Eva, I so agree with your conclusion. We know Richard could, because he did!
Dominic showed and proved what we have been saying here ever since his body was found. He was quite capable, he didn't have a hunchback, and his disability would not have been obvious once he was dressed.
I think it was inevitable that he would get a bit "puffed out" but all of us have some physical weaknesses.

Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Hi Paul,
I agree with about dissolute being ridiculous.
I have watched the program two times now and got the feeling, that whenever a possible effect of the
outcome of the research on Richard's health is discussed , they always tend to stress the worst case.
Dominic tired quickly on the treadmill-" this could have proved fatal for Richard on a medieval battlefield"
"Richard's health was further compromised by roundworms- potentially debilitating causing nausea, vomiting and diarrhea""Greed ran in the family," Edward was thought to be a glutton- as Richard had access to the same rich food, he may well have been the same." His body was in no shape for fighting."
Apart from that I think Dominic was playing his part well and it was worth while watching how a man with a similar scoliosis could perform the tasks he was tested on.
I never doubted that Richard could, anyway!
Eva

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 8/20/14, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] <> wrote:

Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary
To: "" <>
Date: Wednesday, August 20, 2014, 7:47 PM



Hi All,

This is my first post. I have been lurking for a while. I was introduced to Richard when I was at uni back in the 90's. Of course I knew the play from high school - but at uni I took to reading the books in the History department as they were more interesting than my Science courses. I came across Clement Markhams book and loved it. It read like a novel and his alternative view of Richard and Henry was mind blowing to a kid who had been taught standard "history". Ever since then I have been on Richard's side so to speak. I would pick up any book on Richard - fiction or non - and just enjoy getting to know him. The discovery of his bones has rekindled my interest.
On this issue of Richards diet in the last years of his life...The paper seems to present the boozing as a theory because they cannot explain the isotopes any other way. Which IMO is bad Science. I don't want Richard to be perfect - I don't like perfect - so I don't mind if he hit the bottle a bit. Who would'nt? He had just lost the three people he loved most in the world (IMO) - his brother, child and wife. He was forced into a life or death power struggle that I am sure he would have preferred never happened. He was dragged from his beloved home and region into a highly politicised and treacherous environment. He had to assume a highly stressful job. He had the financial issues brought on by an empty treasury and he was preparing for a foreigh invasion. That is a helluva lot to deal with.
As to the diet - could it not just be a simple case of being constantly entertained by nobles and merchants and whatnot when he became King? It is reasonable that he had to attend more banquets as a new King and being like anyone else he probably just ate what was put in front of him. And as King he would also have to entertain lavishly. I don't think he was fat or greedy - just in a changed circumstance. I relocated for work a year back and have put on 12kg's. It is mainly comfort eating as I am stressed in a new city and job, missing my family and lack routine in this new environment. I am also the most unfit person ever and never exercise - yet there is not all that much difference in my dress size and all the rest. Richard was a physically active man who started off skinny - I am sure a few extra pounds would probably look good on him.








Hi Eva, I so agree with your conclusion. We
know Richard could, because he did!

Dominic showed and proved what we have been saying here ever
since his body was found. He was quite capable, he
didn't have a hunchback, and his disability would not
have been obvious once he was dressed.

I think it was inevitable that he would get a bit
"puffed out" but all of us have some physical
weaknesses.
Jess

Sent
from Yahoo Mail on Android








From:

eva.pitter@...
[]
<>;



To:


<>;




Subject:

Re:
Channel 4 Documentary


Sent:

Wed, Aug 20, 2014 5:32:18 PM
















Hi Paul,
I agree with about
dissolute being ridiculous.
I have watched
the program two times now and got the feeling, that whenever
a possible effect of the
outcome of the
research on Richard's health is discussed , they always
tend to stress the worst case.
Dominic tired
quickly on the treadmill-" this could have proved fatal
for Richard on a medieval battlefield"
"Richard's health was further
compromised by roundworms- potentially debilitating causing
nausea, vomiting and diarrhea""Greed ran in the
family," Edward was thought to be a glutton- as Richard
had access to the same rich food, he may well have been the
same." His body was in no shape for fighting."
Apart from that I think Dominic was playing his
part well and it was worth while watching how a man with a
similar scoliosis could perform the
tasks he was tested on.
I never doubted
that Richard could, anyway!
Eva






















#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680 --
#yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp {
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px
0;padding:0 10px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp hr {
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp #yiv9639200680hd {
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp #yiv9639200680ads {
margin-bottom:10px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp .yiv9639200680ad {
padding:0 0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp .yiv9639200680ad p {
margin:0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mkp .yiv9639200680ad a {
color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9639200680ygrp-lc {
font-family:Arial;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9639200680ygrp-lc #yiv9639200680hd {
margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor
#yiv9639200680ygrp-lc .yiv9639200680ad {
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680actions {
font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity {
background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity span {
font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity span:first-child {
text-transform:uppercase;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity span a {
color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity span span {
color:#ff7900;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680activity span
.yiv9639200680underline {
text-decoration:underline;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680attach {
clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680attach div a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680attach img {
border:none;padding-right:5px;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680attach label {
display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680attach label a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 blockquote {
margin:0 0 0 4px;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680bold {
font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680bold a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 dd.yiv9639200680last p a {
font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 dd.yiv9639200680last p span {
margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 dd.yiv9639200680last p
span.yiv9639200680yshortcuts {
margin-right:0;}

#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680attach-table div div a {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680attach-table {
width:400px;}

#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680file-title a, #yiv9639200680
div.yiv9639200680file-title a:active, #yiv9639200680
div.yiv9639200680file-title a:hover, #yiv9639200680
div.yiv9639200680file-title a:visited {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680photo-title a,
#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680photo-title a:active,
#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680photo-title a:hover,
#yiv9639200680 div.yiv9639200680photo-title a:visited {
text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 div#yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg
#yiv9639200680ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9639200680yshortcuts {
font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680green {
color:#628c2a;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680MsoNormal {
margin:0 0 0 0;}

#yiv9639200680 o {
font-size:0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680photos div {
float:left;width:72px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680photos div div {
border:1px solid
#666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680photos div label {
color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680reco-category {
font-size:77%;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680reco-desc {
font-size:77%;}

#yiv9639200680 .yiv9639200680replbq {
margin:4px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {
margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg {
font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg table {
font-size:inherit;font:100%;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg select,
#yiv9639200680 input, #yiv9639200680 textarea {
font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9639200680
code {
font:115% monospace;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg * {
line-height:1.22em;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9639200680logo {
padding-bottom:10px;}


#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-msg p a {
font-family:Verdana;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-msg
p#yiv9639200680attach-count span {
color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-reco
#yiv9639200680reco-head {
color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-reco {
margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor #yiv9639200680ov
li a {
font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor #yiv9639200680ov
li {
font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-sponsor #yiv9639200680ov
ul {
margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-text {
font-family:Georgia;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-text p {
margin:0 0 1em 0;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-text tt {
font-size:120%;}

#yiv9639200680 #yiv9639200680ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {
border-right:none !important;
}
#yiv9639200680

Eva wrote

'There is another thing I have to say about the wine consumption of Richard. As I did not quite understand, that Dr Lamb talked of one bottle a day and then the commentator said he drank 3 liters, I watched again. It seemsthat Dr Ian Mortimer prompted this conclusion with his statement, that rich people never drank water. But I remembered that I had read otherwise. I took my biography of Charles the Bold by Klaus Schelle from the shelf and there I soon found the sentence I had remembered: "At his dinner, he drinks only watered wine."
I think it is another myth about the Middle Ages, that all water was polluted and nobody ever drank water.'

Marie here:

You're both right. Nobody drank pure water because it wasn't safe, but they did drink watered wine - in fact, mostly watered wine. Apparently if you mix wine with water most of the bacteria in the water are dead after about 20 minutes - or so I've been told.

Eva wrote

'There is another thing I have to say about the wine consumption of Richard. As I did not quite understand, that Dr Lamb talked of one bottle a day and then the commentator said he drank 3 liters, I watched again. It seemsthat Dr Ian Mortimer prompted this conclusion with his statement, that rich people never drank water. But I remembered that I had read otherwise. I took my biography of Charles the Bold by Klaus Schelle from the shelf and there I soon found the sentence I had remembered: "At his dinner, he drinks only watered wine."
I think it is another myth about the Middle Ages, that all water was polluted and nobody ever drank water.'

Marie here:

You're both right. Nobody drank pure water because it wasn't safe, but they did drink watered wine - in fact, mostly watered wine. Apparently if you mix wine with water most of the bacteria in the water are dead after about 20 minutes - or so I've been told.

Eileen wrote:

Well for example spring water would have been safe. Where I live there is spring water gushing from a fountain in a wall that originates from the Cotswold Hills...In fact there was a plan to bottle it a few years ago that swiftly got vetoed by people living in the village. Maybe before everywhere got so built up there would have been more springs and their water readily available. This is only an example that some drinking water would have been perfectly OK

Marie:

That's perfectly true, of course. My mother's family had their own spring for drinking water back in the day. Most castles had deep wells, of course, too. Whether people understood that some water sources were safe and some weren't, I don't know, (other than dirty, smelly water, of course) but we're always told they drank beer and diluted wine for safety reasons. Then, of course, once beer and wine come into use you get the inevitable effect of plain water seeming like a penance. In fact, dry bread and water was literally used as a penance/ punishment, wasn't it?

Eileen wrote:

Well for example spring water would have been safe. Where I live there is spring water gushing from a fountain in a wall that originates from the Cotswold Hills...In fact there was a plan to bottle it a few years ago that swiftly got vetoed by people living in the village. Maybe before everywhere got so built up there would have been more springs and their water readily available. This is only an example that some drinking water would have been perfectly OK

Marie:

That's perfectly true, of course. My mother's family had their own spring for drinking water back in the day. Most castles had deep wells, of course, too. Whether people understood that some water sources were safe and some weren't, I don't know, (other than dirty, smelly water, of course) but we're always told they drank beer and diluted wine for safety reasons. Then, of course, once beer and wine come into use you get the inevitable effect of plain water seeming like a penance. In fact, dry bread and water was literally used as a penance/ punishment, wasn't it?

We live in the country about thirty miles north of San Antonio. We have a well, and the water is good. We test it every year, but to far so good. We have been there thirty years, so some repairs are greatly needed  a little roofing, and re-grading of our road. We have a dog, and some semi-feral cats, plus a wounded vulture who eats dog food, and an army of raccoons which eat everything. We also have deer, turkeys, an occasional fox, and wonderful birds.

I read about the lovely old homes in the English countryside, and think, hmmmm, lots of money, time and energy to really live comfortably! I saw a snippet of Lady Carnarvon speaking about their home, Highclere, where Downton Abbey is filmed. They get no cell phone reception, or television, and lots of problems, but she muddles through!

From: [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 8:52 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

When I first got married in 1967, we had a small cottage in the country, and the only water supply was a pump at a well by the back door. It was lovely water. Eventually they laid in a water supply to our lane, and we joined the chlorine brigade. It didn't make as good a cuppa, I can tell you that. Oh, and the cottage in the country' thing wasn't what it's cracked up to be. We had shrews, mice, hornets, flying ants, rising damp, a sagging ceiling, a leaky chimney and, once, the entire yellow-jacketed Berkeley Hunt in the backyard  the hounds had picked up a scent that was NOT a fox, but our pet cats. Luckily the cats rushed inside.

Sandra

=^..^=

From: mariewalsh2003

Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 2:44 PM

To:

Subject: Re: Channel 4 Documentary

Eileen wrote:

Well for example spring water would have been safe. Where I live there is spring water gushing from a fountain in a wall that originates from the Cotswold Hills...In fact there was a plan to bottle it a few years ago that swiftly got vetoed by people living in the village. Maybe before everywhere got so built up there would have been more springs and their water readily available. This is only an example that some drinking water would have been perfectly OK

Marie:

That's perfectly true, of course. My mother's family had their own spring for drinking water back in the day. Most castles had deep wells, of course, too. Whether people understood that some water sources were safe and some weren't, I don't know, (other than dirty, smelly water, of course) but we're always told they drank beer and diluted wine for safety reasons. Then, of course, once beer and wine come into use you get the inevitable effect of plain water seeming like a penance. In fact, dry bread and water was literally used as a penance/ punishment, wasn't it?

Hilary, I did not mean to criticize Ian Mortimer. In fact I was glad, that he made the historical comments in thedocumentation. I only thought , that because he said, rich people never drank water the idea that Richard drank 3 liters a day was the consequence. He did not mention,however, that the wine, even for the rich, could be diluted with water. As a consequence I had to read in my Viennese Newspaper " Richard III was an alcoholic".
We  know that Middleham castle had its own well in the cellar, far away from the numerous Garderobe Towers, so I think it was not polluted. But I think, even in London the rich would be able to get some spring water for their kitchen.
 Drinking water is only lately propagated in our days. In my childhood some people would say " If you drink water you get lice in your stomach". May be that proverb has its roots in times when it was not safe to drink water.
Eva

Hi Maria,

I can just see him doing it.....lol !

Best wishes

Kathryn x