Richard III

[Birchy]

So Richard III was not a murdering, disfigured hunchback? Then who insisted that Skakespeare write him thus? Is there any real historical evidence that points one way or the other?

[Waterwolf]

Nobody 'insisted' anything to Shakespeare. He was writing at the time of the Tudors, who of course came to power when Henry VII defeated Richard III. If Shakespeare had dared to portray Richard as anything other than a complete villain, he would have been a sure-fire candidate for the chopping block. It was simply a matter of making the contemporary ruling house look good. As to what Richard was really like, as far as I know the jury is still out on the Princes in the Tower. But all historical accounts and sources are biased in their own way, so I doubt we'll ever know for sure. And that's the beauty of history!

[Quizmonster]

On the matter of his disfigurement, portraits apparently show no evidence of a hunched back. Of course, portraits then were frequently kinder to the sitters than they deserved, at least until Cromwell insisted he be portrayed "warts and all". However, there is no reference to such a deformity in contemporary written accounts either and they were often less than flattering. The most that can be said, apparently, is that he had one shoulder slightly higher than the other. That was enough to permit Shakespeare and others to show poor Richard as a twisted monster in order - as the earlier answer says - to soft-soap the current ruler.

[Hippy]

History is not about facts, but the fictions that people believe. Every historical document says a lot about the person writing it, and some passing references to the subject about which they write. The clever stuff is to unscramble it all.

After that you get a version that accords with the truth - - - Oh! no! it's YOUR version. The truth may be in there somewhere; at least the truth about you!

[woofgang]

If you like vintage detective type fiction, theres a great book about this called "the daughter of time" by Marjorie Allingham

[woofgang]

corrigendum dum dum, its not marjorie allingham, its josephine tey, sorry