FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Richard III in History

by BINOY KAMPMARK

Nothing was glorious about his bloody demise, and one can’t help but think that he understood the implications of what would happen even before the Battle of Bosworth Field (1485).  Certainly, William Shakespeare understood Richard III better than most.  The genius of the Bard has been precisely in using artifice in drama as a means of finding certainty, or at the very least, an account as accurate as any historian ever could.

What exactly does the discovery of Richard III’s remains in a parking lot in Leicester mean for the reviled monarch?  For dramatists, the last Plantagenet king is a source of immense excitement, doing very well when it comes to orders and rentals from costumers.  After that other great psychological wreck Hamlet, Richard makes a good fist of it in second place, the subject of orders for drama societies to state theatre companies every week.

The fate of his body is like that of any character of history who straddles the myths of power and death.  The most recent mania with finding a historically significant body was, of course, Osama bin Laden.  The quest to do so was a peculiar American fixation, one that combined elements of cinematic morality with speculative fantasy.  The fate of the notable body in history has a long currency of discussion.

The dark image of Richard was that version crafted by Thomas More in his History of King Richard III (1520).  Then came the unabashedly partisan chronicles of Raphael Holinshed, published in two editions, 1577 and 1587.  This was the Tudor refit, the victor’s bashing narrative written for the service of a useful history.  For More, the ruler was nothing short of sinister, and furthermore, lacked legitimacy.  Yet, in terms of human failing and the misfortunes of power, More would pay with his life at the hands of Henry VIII. The Tudors certainly knew a thing or two about bloodletting.

It took another discovery to challenge aspects of this crude assertion of Richard III’s legitimacy – the parliamentary Act of Settlement (1484) found by William Camden of the Society of Antiquaries.  Because the Act of Settlement suggested a good deal of power and involvement by Parliament vis-à-vis royal rule, Richard III found himself being revised and re-kitted by various historians.  This has been a point of debate in much Jacobean historiography.

The Richard III Society is punch drunk with the discovery, desperate to clear the monarch’s name on the historical tablets.  Rather than being an ugly hunchbacked misanthrope who made the pathway to the triumph of Henry Tudor easier, he was a scoliosis suffering, attractive, enlightened sort who balanced the ledger of merit for England’s good.  Well, sort of.

Suspicious, bitter Richard, it has been pointed out, made the presumption of innocence fundamental to the British common law system.  He set the building blocks for a unitary state.  But viciousness has chips, edges, and surfaces – it is never flat.  History, or at the very least its consumers, demands its virtuous criminals with various pathologies.  “What is certain,” claims a convinced Wayne K. Spear (National Post, Feb 7), “is that Richard lived at a time in which a degree of ruthlessness was a royal aspirant’s prerequisite, and the elimination of one’s rivals, both real and potential as well as past and present, a matter to be taken for granted.”  Even historian Andrew Roberts suggests that the Plantagenet dynasty, as a whole, be taken more seriously as durable state builders rather than oafish fools of office (The Daily Beast, Feb 6).

The discovery of Richard’s remains also taps into a consumer obsession with criminal culture, the forensic specialist as history maker.  American crime novellas and mini-series have paved the way for that, making the discovery of corpses through such characters as Dr. Temperance “Bones” Brennan sparklingly sexy.  A visiting centre in Leicester is already being planned after the discovery.  The University of Leicester is eager for increased publicity – as the press conference showed all too vividly: “The University of Leicester confirms the discovery of Richard III.”  The City of York, however, will have none of this chest beating nonsense, and demands the royal bones in what has become a Plantagenet dispute in modern dress.

This point is entirely missed on an overly enthusiastic Lemont Dobson of the School of Public Service and Global Citizenship at Central Michigan University.  “This is one of those things where people are talking about archaeology and real science, not pseudoscience on television” (Christian Science Monitor, Feb 4). Expect, it would seem, an exhumation craze in due course, something the Church of England, the Queen and her ministers have been fearful of entertaining.  Legitimacy might be lost in an instant.

The entire episode has troubled a few scientists, who have shaken heads at the release of the results before further tests were done to rule out DNA contamination (The Atlantic, Feb 7).  Maria Avila, a computational biologist at the Centre for GeoGenetics at the Natural History Museum of Denmark was sceptical.  “The DNA results presented today are too weak, as they stand, to support the claim that DNA is actually from Richard III.”

But it remains the dramatisation of the figure which survives any DNA efforts.  As the Cambridge classicist Mary Beard tweeted with resounding common sense, “Does it have any HISTORICAL significance?”  Other than causing a spike in commercial interest and a popularisation of archaeology, probably not.  Shakespeare will remain, as he has been for centuries, the true interpreter of Richard’s legacy.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
July 01, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
Hillary: Ordinarily Awful or Uncommonly Awful?
Rob Urie
Liberal Pragmatism and the End of Political Possibility
Pam Martens
Clinton Says Wall Street Banks Aren’t the Threat, But Her Platform Writers Think They are
Michael Hudson
The Silence of the Left: Brexit, Euro-Austerity and the T-TIP
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh
Marx on Financial Bubbles: Much Keener Insights Than Contemporary Economists
Evan Jones
Ancillary Lessons from Brexit
Jason Hirthler
Washington’s Not-So-Invisible Hand: It’s Not Economics, It’s Empire
Mike Whitney
Another Fed Fiasco: U.S. Bond Yields Fall to Record Lows
Aidan O'Brien
Brexit: the English and Welsh Enlightenment
Jeremy R. Hammond
How Turkey’s Reconciliation Deal with Israel Harms the Palestinians
Margaret Kimberley
Beneficial Chaos: the Good News About Brexit
Phyllis Bennis
From Paris to Istanbul, More ‘War on Terror’ Means More Terrorist Attacks
Dan Bacher
Ventura Oil Spill Highlights Big Oil Regulatory Capture
Ishmael Reed
OJ and Jeffrey Toobin: Black Bogeyman Auctioneer
Ron Jacobs
Let There Be Rock
Ajamu Baraka
Paris, Orlando and Turkey: Displacing the Narrative of Western Innocence
Pete Dolack
Brexit Will Only Count If Everybody Leaves the EU
Robert Fantina
The First Amendment, BDS and Third-Party Candidates
Julian Vigo
Xenophobia in the UK
David Rosen
Whatever Happened to Utopia?
Andre Vltchek
Brexit – Let the UK Screw Itself!
Jonathan Latham
107 Nobel Laureate Attack on Greenpeace Traced Back to Biotech PR Operators
Steve Horn
Fracked Gas LNG Exports Were Centerpiece In Promotion of Panama Canal Expansion, Documents Reveal
Robert Koehler
The Right to Bear Courage
Colin Todhunter
Pro-GMO Spin Masquerading as Science Courtesy of “Shameful White Men of Privilege”
Eoin Higgins
Running on Empty: Sanders’s Influence on the Democratic Party Platform
Binoy Kampmark
Who is Special Now? The Mythology Behind the US-British Relationship
Mark B. Baldwin
Russia to the Grexit?
Andrew Wimmer
Killer Grief
Manuel E. Yepe
Sanders, Socialism and the New Times
Franklin Lamb
ISIS is Gone, But Its Barbarity Still Haunts Palmyra
Mark Weisbrot
A Policy of Non-Intervention in Venezuela Would be a Welcome Change
Matthew Stevenson
Larry Cameron Explains Brexit
Cesar Chelala
How Tobacco Became the Opium War of the 21st Century
Joseph Natoli
How We Reached the Point Where We Can’t Hear Each Other
Andrew Stewart
Skip “Hamilton” and Read Gore Vidal’s “Burr”
George Wuerthner
Ranching and the Future of the Sage Grouse
Thomas Knapp
Yes, a GOP Delegate Revolt is Possible
Gilbert Mercier
Democracy Is Dead
Missy Comley Beattie
A Big F#*K You to Voters
Charles R. Larson
Mychal Denzel Smith’s “Invisible Man, Got the Whole World Watching: a Young Black Man’s Education”
Barbara Nimri Aziz
Four Morning Ducks
David Yearsley
Where the Sidewalk Ends: Walking the Bad Streets of Houston’s Super-Elites
Christopher Brauchli
Educating Kansas
Andy Piascik
The Hills of Connecticut: Where Theatre and Life Became One
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail