RIchard III is NOT a villain
dedicated to Virginia Munro
Shakespeare's Richard III is normally pretty much maligned as the deformed villain. Scratch beneath the surface and you'll find people championing him and a contemporary committed call for a revision and history to be corrected.
That a writer can change how a king is viewed is pretty potent - that people power can call at least for some historical clarity of monarchical histories is also interesting.
I know some medieval history but I'm no monarchist. In fact the opposite - taking Richard's famous ejaculation at the climax of the Battle of Bosworth Field and twisting it
My kingdom for a horse!
In my version he gets the horse and Dicky the Turd has to make good on his promise. After the imperious bloodbath Maisy gets a crown and is ruler of fair Albion. Not sure if any Windsors or even Saxe-Coburgs take after Maisy for that matter. It's a bit reminiscent of Caligula but cute.
Shakespeare's Richard III is normally pretty much maligned as the deformed villain. Scratch beneath the surface and you'll find people championing him and a contemporary committed call for a revision and history to be corrected.
That a writer can change how a king is viewed is pretty potent - that people power can call at least for some historical clarity of monarchical histories is also interesting.
I know some medieval history but I'm no monarchist. In fact the opposite - taking Richard's famous ejaculation at the climax of the Battle of Bosworth Field and twisting it
My kingdom for a horse!
In my version he gets the horse and Dicky the Turd has to make good on his promise. After the imperious bloodbath Maisy gets a crown and is ruler of fair Albion. Not sure if any Windsors or even Saxe-Coburgs take after Maisy for that matter. It's a bit reminiscent of Caligula but cute.
