Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:38:01.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 16 - Richard III

Fact, Myth, Fiction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2022

By
Anna Ilona Rajala  and
Timo Uotinen
Edited by
Irma Taavitsainen ,
Turo Hiltunen ,
Jeremy J. Smith  and
Carla Suhr
Irma Taavitsainen
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Turo Hiltunen
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Jeremy J. Smith
Affiliation:
University of Glasgow
Carla Suhr
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Get access

Summary

In this chapter we study representations of the last Plantagenet king of England, Richard III, relating his myth and history to the discovery of his body in 2012 in a Leicester car park. Focusing on the body of Richard, we address the unique cross-genre nexus between historiography, Shakespeare’s drama, and modern medical writing, to evaluate the mythical, factual, fictitious, and scientific depictions of Richard. Our aim is to find out what role interpretation and truth play in the differing genres and what kind of implications interpretation and truth have for these genres regarding the body of Richard. We draw on literary studies, disability studies, health sciences, and especially the work of Horkheimer and Adorno to argue that, in the case of Richard, myth and science are modes of representation that seek to control truth and rely on interpretation and speculation to draw conclusions about uncertain and unknowable things. The post-excavation science does not oppose myth and fiction, but perpetuates the mythology surrounding Richard, whereas Shakespeare drama has ‘truth content’ in challenging conceptions of disability. Moreover, this cross-genre nexus demonstrates the inseparability of subjectivity from interpretation and that truth never appears unmediated. Thus, making subjectivity visible in analyses is indispensible for a higher fidelity to truth.

Keywords

Richard IIIbodydisabilitydialectic of enlightenmentsubjectivityShakespeare
Type
Chapter
Information
Genre in English Medical Writing, 1500–1820
Sociocultural Contexts of Production and Use
 , pp. 278 - 296
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, Theodor W. 1997. Aesthetic theory. Robert Hullot-Kentor (trans.). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Appleby, Jo, Mitchell, Piers D., Robinson, Claire, Brough, Alison, Rutty, Guy, Harris, Russell A., Thompson, David, & Morgan, Bruno. 2014. The scoliosis of Richard III, last Plantagenet king of England: Diagnosis and clinical significance. The Lancet 383(9932): 1944.Google Scholar
Ashdown-Hill, John. 2015. The mythology of Richard III. Stroud: Amberley Publishing.Google Scholar
Baldwin, David. 2015. Richard III, rev. ed. Stroud: Amberley Publishing.Google Scholar
Bruyneel, Anne-Violette, Chavet, Pascale, Bollini, Gérard, Allard, Paul, Berton, Eric, & Mesure, Serge. 2009. Dynamical asymmetries in idiopathic scoliosis during forward and lateral initiation step. European Spine Journal 18(2): 188–95.Google Scholar
Buckley, Richard, Morris, Mathew, Appleby, Jo, King, Turi, O’Sullivan, Deirdre, & Foxhall, Lin. 2013. ‘The king in the car park’: New light on the death and burial of Richard III in the Grey Friars Church, Leicester, in 1485. Antiquity 87(336): 519–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullough, Geoffrey (ed.). 1975. Narrative and dramatic sources of Shakespeare, vol. III. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Carr, E. H. 1987. What is history? 2nd ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Carson, Annette. 2013. Richard III: The maligned king, updated ed. Stroud: History Press.Google Scholar
Charnes, Linda. 1993. Notorious identity: Materializing the subject in Shakespeare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Comber, Abigail Elizabeth. 2010. A medieval king ‘disabled’ by an early modern construct. In Eyler, Joshua R. (ed.), Disability in the Middle Ages: Reconsiderations and reverberations, 183–96. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davis, Lennard J. 2002. Bending over backwards: Disability, dismodernism, and other difficult positions. New York: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyler, Joshua R. 2016. Introduction: Breaking boundaries, building bridges. In Eyler, Joshua R. (ed.), Disability in the Middle Ages: Reconsiderations and reverberations, 1–10. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garber, Marjorie. 1987. Shakespeare’s ghost writers: Literature as uncanny causality. New York; London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, Christine M. 2018. ‘Unaccomodated man’: Dismodernism and disability justice in King Lear. Disability Studies Quarterly 38(4). https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/6079/5133 (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Goy-Blanquet, Dominique. 2002. Elizabethan historiography and Shakespeare’s sources. In Hattaway, Michael (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Shakespeare’s history plays, 57–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greenblatt, Stephen, Cohen, Walter, Howard, Jean E., & Maus, Katherine Eisaman. 2008. The Norton Shakespeare: Essential plays, the sonnets. 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Haber, Cassandra Kay, & Sacco, Mark. 2015. Scoliosis: Lower limb asymmetries during the gait cycle. Archives of Physiotherapy 5(1): 4.Google Scholar
Hammond, Anthony. 1981. Introduction. In Hammond, Anthony (ed.), Shakespeare, William, King Richard III. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Hanham, Alison. 1975. Richard III and his early historians, 1483–1535. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hay, William. 1754. Deformity: An essay. London: R. & J. Dodsley.Google Scholar
Heller, Agnes. 2002. The time is out of joint: Shakespeare as philosopher of history. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Hicks, Michael. 2019. Richard III: The self-made king. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, Thomas. 1571. The contemplation of mankinde contayning a singuler discourse after the art of phisiognomie. London: Henry Denham for William Seres.Google Scholar
Hobgood, Allison P. 2014. Teeth before eyes impairment and invisibility in Shakespeare’s Richard III. In Iyengar, Sujata (ed.), Disability, health, and happiness in the Shakespearean body, 3–40. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hobgood, Allison P., & Wood, David Houston. 2013. Recovering disability in early modern England. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Holderness, Graham. 2000. Shakespeare: The histories. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Holinshed, Raphael. 1808. Holinshed’s chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland. London: for J. Johnson; F. C. and J. Rivington; T. Payne; Wilkie and Robinson; Longman, Hurst, Rees, and Orme; Cadell and Davies; and J. Mawman.Google Scholar
Hope, Jenny, & Zolfagharifard, Ellie. 2014. Richard III wasn’t a hunchback: Scans reveal monarch’s spinal curvature could have been concealed. Daily Mail 30 May. www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2643056/Richard-III-wasnt-hunchback-did-scoliosis-scans-reveal.html (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max, & Adorno, Theodor W. 2002. Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical fragments. Edmund Jephcott (trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Horspool, David. 2015. Richard III: A ruler and his reputation. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Sujata. 2015. Introduction: Shakespeare’s ‘discourse of disability’. In Iyengar, Sujata (ed.), Disability, health, and happiness in the Shakespearean body, 1–20. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jacob, E. F. 1961. The Oxford history of England: The fifteenth century 1399–1485. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jowett, John. 2000. Introduction. In Jowett, John (ed.), Shakespeare, William, Richard III, 1–132. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kendall, Paul Murray. 2002. Richard III. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
King, Turi E., Fortes, Gloria Gonzalez, Balaresque, Patricia, Thomas, Mark, Balding, David, Delser, Pierpaolo Maisano, Neumann, Rita, Parson, Walther, Knapp, Michael, Walsh, Susan, Tonasso, Laure, Holt, John, Kayser, Manfred, Appleby, Jo, Forster, Peter, Ekserdijian, David, Hofreiter, Michael, & Schürer, Kevin. 2014. Identification of the remains of King Richard III. Nature Communications 5(1): 5631.Google Scholar
Kostihova, Marcela. 2016. Digging for perfection: Discourse of deformity in Richard III’s excavation. Palgrave Communications 2(1). www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201646 (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Kuo, Fang-Chuan, Hong, Chang-Zern, Lai, Chung-Liang, & Tan, Shih-Hsin. 2011. Postural control strategies related to anticipatory perturbation and quick perturbation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 36(10): 810–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legge, Alfred Owen. 1885. The unpopular king: The life and times of Richard III. In two volumes. London: Ward & Downey.Google Scholar
Lewis, Matthew. 2019. Richard III: Facts and fictions. Barnsley: Pen and Sword History.Google Scholar
Love, Genevieve. 2019. Early modern theatre and the figure of disability. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Mantel, Hilary. 2013. Royal bodies. London Review of Books 35(4). www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v35/n04/hilary-mantel/royal-bodies (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Meikle, James. 2014. Richard III was no ‘bunch-backed toad’, research suggests. The Guardian 30 May. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/30/richard-iii-no-bunch-backed-toad-hunchback-research-lancet (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Metzler, Irina. 2006. Disability in medieval Europe: Thinking about physical impairment during the High Middle Ages, c. 1100–1400. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mitchell, David T., & Snyder, Sharon L.. 2000. Narrative prosthesis: Disability and the dependencies of discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Modern Healthcare. 2014. Correcting the twisted facts on Richard III. Modern Healthcare 44(23): 36.Google Scholar
More, Thomas. 2005. The history of King Richard the Third: A reading edition. Logan, George M. (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Muir, Kenneth. 1977. The sources of Shakespeare’s plays. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Myers, A. R. 1968. Richard III and historical tradition. History 53(178): 181–202.Google Scholar
Negrini, Stefano, Donzelli, Sabrina, Aulisa, Angelo Gabriele, Czaprowski, Dariusz, Schreiber, Sanja, de Mauroy, Jean Claude, Diers, Helmut, et al. 2018. 2016 SOSORT guidelines: Orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth. Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders 13(1): 3.Google Scholar
Rous, John. (n.d.). The Rous Roll, c. 1483–1484. British Library Digitised Manuscripts. www.bl.uk/manuscripts/FullDisplay.aspx?ref=Add_MS_48976 (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Schwyzer, Philip. 2013. Shakespeare and the remains of Richard III. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, Tom. 2006. Disability rights and wrongs. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skidmore, Chris. 2018. Richard III: England’s most controversial king. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Slotkin, Joel Elliot. 2007. Honeyed toads: Sinister aesthetics in Shakespeare’s ‘Richard III’. Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 7: 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syczewska, Malgorzata, Graff, Krzysztof, Kalinowska, Malgorzata, Szczerbik, Ewa, & Domaniecki, Janusz. 2012. Influence of the structural deformity of the spine on the gait pathology in scoliotic patients. Gait & Posture 35(2): 209–13.Google Scholar
Vergil, Polydore. 1846. Polydore Vergil’s English history. London: Camden Society.Google Scholar
Williams, Katherine Schaap. 2009. Enabling Richard: The rhetoric of disability in Richard III. Disability Studies Quarterly 29(4). https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/997/1181 (accessed 26 April 2022).Google Scholar
Williams, Katherine Schaap. 2013. Performing disability and theorizing deformity. English Studies: Shakespeare and Theory: Special Issue II 94(7): 757–72.Google Scholar
Wilson, Jeffrey R. 2017. The trouble with disability in Shakespeare studies. Disability Studies Quarterly 37(2). https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/5430/0 (accessed 15 June 2020).Google Scholar
Wilson, Jeffrey R. 2018. ‘Savage and deformed’: Stigma as drama in The Tempest. Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England 31: 146–77.Google Scholar
Wood, David Houston. 2013. New directions: ‘Some tardy cripple’: Timing disability in Richard III. In Connolly, Annaliese (ed.), Richard III: A Critical Reader, 129–57. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Yang, Jae Hyuk, Suh, Seung-Woo, Sung, Paul S., & Park, Woo-Hyung. 2013. Asymmetrical gait in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. European Spine Journal 22(11): 2407–13.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×