Facial Reconstructions Gives Us Clearer Picture of Richard III


 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

We recently had our own little controversy in Orange County at the beginning of winter about newly discovered bones of some apparent historical value, in which some commentary suggested that they be treated with something less than respect, leading to some contention and controversy.  So it is indeed timely that we have another, bigger and brighter, “dug-up bones” story to report now: is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this son of York?  (You know, Richard III.)

If you haven’t been following this story and need a Tudor, you can find none better than the Manchester Guardian, which has been reconstructing all aspects of the story in great detail.

Richard III's skeleton

Richard III’s scoliotic skeleton, now footloose.

In that publication, you’ll find that Leicester (home of Bosworth Field) and York (home of the Plantagenets) are now engaged in a tug of war over the bones.  But the really interesting news of the day is the release of a reconstruction showing the appearance of Richard III’s face!

This, of course, not it.  Although the above did lead directly to this …

… which one of us older folks will be happy to explain if and as needed. At least now you have a good place to discuss it all. We can work it out.  As for the bones: A hearse!  A hearse!

P.S. Those continual Native American complaints about their burial grounds and remains recovered from them not being treated with respect seem a little less absurd today, eh what?  (Go ahead, try to distinguish the situations, I dare you.)


About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose worker's rights and government accountability attorney, residing in northwest Brea. General Counsel of CATER, the Coalition of Anaheim Taxpayers for Economic Responsibility, a non-partisan group of people sick of local corruption. Deposed as Northern Vice Chair of DPOC in April 2014 when his anti-corruption and pro-consumer work in Anaheim infuriated the Building Trades and Teamsters in spring 2014, who then worked with the lawless and power-mad DPOC Chair to eliminate his internal oversight. Occasionally runs for office to challenge some nasty incumbent who would otherwise run unopposed. (Someday he might pick a fight with the intent to win rather than just dent someone. You'll know it when you see it.) He got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012 and in 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002. None of his pre-putsch writings ever spoke for the Democratic Party at the local, county, state, national, or galactic level, nor do they now. A family member co-owns a business offering campaign treasurer services to Democratic candidates and the odd independent. He is very proud of her. He doesn't directly profit from her work and it doesn't affect his coverage. (He does not always favor her clients, though she might hesitate to take one that he truly hated.) He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.)