murreyandblue

A great WordPress.com site

Archive for the category “Science”

Richard III and Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar aka ‘El Cid’

To continue my series of posts about Richard’s notable genealogical connections, my latest discovery is that he was directly descended from Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar – El Cid!

Statue of El Cid

Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar – El Cid

This time the connection is through his mother’s line and you can see the tree below (in two parts) with red dots showing the direct line of ancestors leading to El Cid.

Picture of Richard III family tree 1

Picture of Richard III family tree 2

But who was El Cid?

In an animated version of his story, he is described as: ‘A man who becomes a knight, a knight who becomes a hero, a hero who becomes a legend!’ But what is fact and what fiction? He is seen as the National Hero of Spain, a heroic warrior who fought to drive the Moors (Muslims) out of Spain. However, he actually fought both against and for the Moors.

There are many published versions of his life and some fictional incidents have passed into history as fact – something he shares with Richard. So, I have read a book  (El Cid: The Making of a Legend by MJ Trow) which analyses all the written records of his life in chronological order and each incident is assessed using likelihood and common sense. Like Richard, contemporary reports are few and the stories became more and more elaborate as time goes on, like a snowball gathering snow. So, let’s start from the beginning.

Rodrigo was born in Vivar, near Burgos, in Spain in about 1043. His family was wealthy and connected to the King, Ferdinand I, being court officials, although they weren’t major players.

Photo of staue of El Cid riding Babieca, his war horse

Statue of El Cid riding Babieca

One legend associated with Rodrigo is about his horse, Babieca. It is said he was offered the pick of an Andalusian herd of horses by his godfather as a coming of age gift and his choice was considered a weak one, causing his godfather to cry: ‘Babieca!’ which means ‘idiot’. However, there are other theories such as that the horse was a gift from a barbarian and the name came from that. Whatever the truth, Babieca certainly became a formidable warhorse and has his own tomb in the monastery of San Pedro de Cardeña, where Rodrigo himself was first buried.

Picture of swords - colada is number 8

‘Colada’ is no. 8

Like the legendary King Arthur, El Cid also had a special sword – in fact more than one. These swords were named ‘Colada’ and ‘Tizona’ and one (possibly actually ‘Colada’ but labelled ‘Tizona’) still survives and is displayed in the Museum of Burgos. In 1999 it was tested and confirmed to be made in the eleventh century in Moorish Cordoba and contained Damascus steel (which is made by a special process that is no longer known today). It is 36.8 in long and weighs 2.5 lb and the hilt is a later edition as is also the inscription which reads:

‘Yo soy la Tizona [que] fue hecha en la era de mil e quarenta’ (I am the Tizona, who was made in the year 1040). And on the reverse side:

‘Ave Maria gratia plena; dominus mecum [sic]’ (Hail Mary, full of grace; the Lord be with me).

Sword 'Tizona' on display in Madrid before 2007

‘Tizona’ on display in Madird before 2007

Rodrigo was the sworn man of Sancho, one of Ferdinand’s three sons, the others being Alfonso and Garcia. As a young man, in 1057, he fought for Sancho against the Moorish stronghold of Zaragoza, making its emir, Al-Muqtadir, one of Sancho’s vassals. However, in 1063, he also fought on Al-Muqtadir’s side against Ferdinand’s half-brother, Ramiro I of Aragon, and his army, who were besieging Zaragoza. Ramiro was killed and the Aragonese army routed and it was rumoured that Rodrigo fought and beat an Aragonese knight in single combat, thereby winning the title Campeador – which translates roughly as ‘Champion’. He is referred to as such in this sixteenth century chronicle of his life.

Page of Chronicle of El Cid

Translation: Chronicle of the very brave knight, El Cid, Rodrigo Diaz, Champion.

Sancho was assassinated in 1072, probably by his brother Alfonso, who wanted to take over Sancho’s lands, and Rodrigo transferred his allegiance to him. The legend has it that he forced Alonso to swear on the Bible in public that he had had nothing to do with Sancho’s murder but, although this is possible, there is no proof of the incident. It is certainly true that the relationship between Rodrigo and Alfonso was difficult and twice Alfonso exiled Rodrigo. The reasons are disputed, but one possibility is because of rumours spread about him by rivals.

In the first of these exiles, in 1080, he offered his services to other rulers in Spain (which then consisted of many small kingdoms), and in 1081, El Cid was accepted by the Moorish king of Zaragoza, Yusuf al-Mu’taman ibn Hud, and served both him and his successor, Al-Mustain II. It was during this period that he was given the title El Cid (The Lord or Master – probably from the Arabic ‘Al-Sayyid’) and served as a successful general of the predominantly Moorish armies, at times against Alfonso.

He became such a formidable foe that, around 1087, Alfonso recalled him for a short time but, when he was exiled for a second time, Rodrigo seems to have decided not to rely on Alfonso’s goodwill but make his own fortune.

Signature of El Cid

El Cid’s signature: ‘ego ruderico’ (I, Rodrigo)

Rodrigo had married Jimena in 1075 and another legend has arisen about their relationship, namely that he had killed her father in one of his first battles and that their relationship was therefore understandably strained. However, again there is no evidence that this is true.

Rodrigo eventually invaded and occupied Valencia, which he conquered by gradually getting control of surrounding towns and lands and finally gained by siege with a combined Christian and Moorish army. He became Valencia’s ruler in 1094, to all intents and purposes a king there. The city was both Christian and Muslim, and both Moors and Christians served in the army and as administrators.

However, after living there peacefully with his wife, Jimena, for about five years, the Almoravids, (Berbers originally from North Africa), besieged Valencia to try to take it back and El Cid died on June 10th 1099, probably from the effects of deprivation and starvation because of the siege.

This belies the well-known film version of his story starring Charlton Heston and Sophia Loren which has a very dramatic scene: after Rodrigo’s death from a battle wound, El Cid’s wife, Jimena dresses him in his armour and mounts him on his famous horse, Babieca, (tied on to prevent him falling off). She sends him off into battle again to inspire his men, who are unaware he has died. A vivid image, but a false one. However, there is a plausible source for this myth, the probably true story that he was buried sitting upright on his throne. His tomb was desecrated during a later attack on the town and some of his bones were lost, but the remains which were saved were reburied in Burgos Cathedral, where they still rest to this day.

Tomb of El Cid and his wife Jimena

Tomb of El Cid and Jimena

It is clear that he was a courageous warrior and intelligent tactician. Before battle, Rodrigo often ordered that classical Roman works on military themes should be read aloud to him and his soldiers, both for entertainment and inspiration. He also utilised brainstorming sessions to discuss tactics and accepted or considered suggestions and ideas from his men. However, he was also ruthless at times and merciful at others. He often used unexpected strategies, utilising what modern tacticians would describe as ‘psychological warfare’ — terror tactics, surprise attacks and distractions for example. He is known to have executed a man by having him buried up to his armpits and then burned alive. In contrast, having captured one of his greatest enemies, Count García Ordóñez, he held him for three days and then let him go.

He probably gained his reputation as a great warrior because he was undefeated in battle (and he fought many, many battles over the years). Regarding one of them, the Historia Roderici tells us ‘… it happened that Rodrigo Diaz fought alone with fifteen enemy soldiers; seven of them were in mail; one of these he killed, two he wounded and unhorsed and the remainder he put to flight by his spirited courage.

To sum up, like Richard, Rodrigo is seen as the ultimate chivalric hero, almost a saint, by some (he was in fact proposed for canonisation by one of his descendants, Don Diego Hurtado de Mendoza) and an unscrupulous, violent chancer, only out for his own ends, by others. Fortunately for Rodrigo, it is the heroic persona that has become the accepted legend, whereas for Richard it is the evil one. Doubtless, for both, the truth is somewhere in between these two extremes.

 

 

 

Image credits:

El Cid by Stan Sheb via Creative Commons licence.

Babieca statue by CarlosVdeHabsburgo (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)%5D, via Wikimedia Commons.

Colada by Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon 6. Auflage 1905 [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Tizona image by Infinauta (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Chronicle in public domain.

Signature by Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar (c. 1050-1099) Created in vector format by P4K1T0 (File:Firma del Cid.jpg) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Tomb by Zarateman (Own work) [CC0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Advertisements

Just like buses …

… you wait over a year for a new book from John Ashdown-Hill and two turn up almost together: Cecily Neville (left) on 30 April and those “Princes” on 15 July, with another volume on Elizabeth Wydeville to follow …

The Archaeological Journal up to 1963 online….

The Archaeological Journal

While searching (and searching and searching) for the inventory of the effects of Roger Mortimer, 1st Earl of March, I happened upon this great site. There are surely some gems in here for everyone. It covers the complete 120 volumes up to 1963 and I recommend it most heartily.

 

 

A swap meet about DNA….

DNA

This swap meet might be very interesting indeed, so I hope those who live near enough will be able to go.

 

 

Doncaster Heritage Festival 2018, and Philippa Langley….

Heritage Festival 2018

Philippa Langley will be giving a talk at this year’s Doncaster Heritage Festival.

“…Writer and producer Philippa Langley MBE will be delivering this year’s David Hey Memorial Lecture – The Looking for Richard Project. In 2012, Philippa led the successful search to locate the grave of King Richard III through the Looking For Richard Project. Philippa conceived, facilitated and commissioned this unique historical investigation.

“You can hear her incredible story at Doncaster Museum & Art Gallery on Sunday 29th April. Tickets £8…”

 

This blog is brought to you …

… by a thing called the internet. The internet may only have been invented by (Sir) Tim Berners-Lee (left) during the eighties but it has a much older patron saint – the seventh century Archbishop of Seville, Isidore.

 

St. Isidore (right), who died in 636, was chosen because he wrote the Etymologiae, an early encyclopedia that unified several classical works that would otherwise have been lost to us.

So, if you are deeply religious and your connection drops out, instead of cursing, you know exactly what to do …

Lucy Worsley’s Fireworks for a Tudor Queen ….

Lucy as Elizabeth I

Lucy Worsley can always been relied upon t)o be entertaining, and her latest documentary – BBC – Lucy Worsley’s Fireworks for a Tudor Queen (2018 – is well up to standard.

BBC – Lucy Worsley's Fireworks for a Tudor Queen - 2018

As the title suggests, she was going to reproduce the sort of amazing fireworks display that might have been created for Elizabeth I. In this particular case, a specific display produced at Kenilworth in 1575 by Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester,  as his last-ditch attempt to win the queen’s hand in marriage.

Elizabethan fireworks

Lucy was in no doubt that the queen was sorely tempted, but in the end Robert received the thumbs-down. The display had cost him a huge fortune, and availed him of nothing. Well, such high stakes might have seemed like a good idea at the time, I suppose, but afterward. . .? Perhaps not.

I knew nothing about early fireworks (or modern ones, come to that) but viewers were guided through an enthralling demonstration of how gerbs, girandolas (which look  like wildly sparkling willow trees when spinning), rockets, a flying, illuminated dragon, and so on were produced. It was a hazardous process, with one spark being capable of combusting the whole darned lot!

The display was painstakingly recreated from a 16th century drawing, and looked quite uninspiring before it was lit. After all, we are accustomed to modern fireworks, which have quite spoiled us for the delights and novelties of their earlier counterparts. But the moment it was “set off”, the Tudor display was quite a sight to see, and the real Elizabeth must have been as enthralled as Lucy’s version.

Lucy's dragon

The illuminated dragon was splendid, floating across the scene as regally as the queen herself. Well, almost. Its landing wasn’t quite to royal standards.

Anyway, I loved the programme, and thoroughly recommend it to everyone.

modern fireworks

modern fireworks

 

Oops, the NY Times claimed Richard wasn’t found in Leicester, but in London….!

ny times - genetics review

Even the New York Times gets it wrong! Apparently an earlier version of a book review had Richard being found in London, not Leicester. Someone advised them, and the error was corrected.

Anyway, to read the whole review of A BRIEF HISTORY OF EVERYONE WHO EVER LIVED: The Human Story Retold Through Our Genes by Adam Rutherford, go here.

The Bones in the Urn again!…a 17th Century Hoax?

 

IMG_4616.JPG

19th century painting of the Henry VII Chapel by an unknown artist.  The entrance to the area where the urn stands is to the left of the tomb of Henry VII

Helen Maurer, in her wonderful article, Whodunnit: The Suspects in the Case  mentioned in the notes  ‘As for why the bones should have been discovered more or less where More said they would be, might it be profitable, if only in the interest of leaving no stone unturned, to forget about Richard, Henry and the late 15th century for the moment and concentrate upon Charles II and the political pressures and perceived necessities of the 1670s.  Any takers?’ Maurer then went on to cover this more fully in her articles Bones in the Tower – Part 2 (1).

IMG_4617

CHARLES II ‘THE MERRY MONARCH’ 

On going to the article, which was printed in the Ricardian in March 1991 pp 2-22, I was intrigued by this theory which seems plausible and makes much sense than the infamous  and ludicrous story given out by More.    In brief, a summary is given of Charles’ reign and the problems he encountered at the time including ‘an abiding public mistrust and rejection of  anything that smacked of absolutism’, religious intolerance, a Parliament who controlled Charles’ pursestrings and a general mistrust of each other.  As Maurer points out ‘As adjunct to these general observations it must be remembered that Charles was the son of a despised and executed monarch.  Experience made him wary.  Unable to  foresee the future, he could only know that tenure of the throne came without guarantees.  It should surprise no-one that Charles became a master of dissimulation….with an overriding concern to preserve what he could of royal power, while ensuring the succession'(2).  It would seem that perhaps the Merry Monarch was not so merry after all.

IMG_4610.JPG

THE INFAMOUS URN ……

Having found this theory plausible,  imagine my delight (and surprise) when listening to Pepys Diary that Pepys made the entry on 25 March 1663 that having gone to the chapel of  White Hall, with the King being present he heard a sermon by Dr Critton (Creighton).  The Dr  ‘told the king and ladies, plainly speaking of death and of skulls, how there is no difference, that nobody could tell that of the great Marius or Alexander from a pyoneer, nor, for all the pain the ladies take with their faces, he that should look into a charnel house should not distinguish which was Cleopatra’s or fair Rosamund’s or Jane Shore‘s (3).  This begs the question that having had  this idea planted in Charles head, and moving on to 1674, with building work being undertaken in the area of the Tower where a stair case was being demoralised. that the opportunity arose to get hold of some bones and plant them.  Bones would have been obtainable with ease considering the numerous  charnel houses and plague pits that abounded at that time.     Furthermore the ‘discovery’ of the bones was reported to Charles by Sir Thomas Critcheley, Master of the Ordnance , someone he was on friendly terms with and with whom he played tennis.  Maurer goes on to say ‘No doubt Critcheley’s report was verified by Charles’ chief surgeon Knight’.  The plot thickens as they say.

In summary Maurer wrote ‘Assessments of Charles’ character and of the situation in 1674 makes it high probable that the decision to commemorate these bones did not stem entirely from Charles’ mercy, as eventually inscribed upon the urn.  The inurnment was a political act, fraught with a political message for Charles’ own time.  This view is strongly supported by the manner in which it was accomplished.  The carelessness with which the remains were interred along with the bones of other animals, including chicken and fish and 3 rusty nails is striking evidence that the chief concern at the time was not reverent burial but the political statement made by a display of the urn.  It did not matter whose bones were placed in it, or whether they were all the same bones found in 1674 or even human bones, so long as something was put in it to be visibly commemorated’.

Samuel_Pepys.jpg

SAMUEL PEPYS, ARTIST JOHN HAYLES. SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY  UNDER King Charles  MP, DIARIST AND FRIEND TO JAMES DUKE OF YORK

If this is indeed what happened and whether Pepys himself had a hand in it – he was indeed on very friendly terms with Charles’ brother James Duke of York, visiting him at the Duke’s home on numerous  occasions according to his diary – is a matter of speculation.  Did the old sermon preached on that day pop into someone’s head. That the bones of Edward IV’s sons, Edward and Richard, the so called ‘princes in the Tower’ would be non discernible from those of the sons of a beggar? And was it used to demonstrate to people that this fate is one that can easily befall disposed monarchs – and was this something to be desired?  Frustratingly Pepys stopped writing his Diary in 1669 and the bones not being ‘discovered’ until 1674 he made no entry pertaining to it.  It also begs the further question, if this speculation was correct, would he have ever written about it anyway?   Pepys wrote in shorthand and possibly he never intended  his diary to come into the public domain.  But it remains a tantalising thought that if only Pepys had continued with his diaries for longer one of the most enduring mysteries of all time may never have arisen.

1200px-James_II_by_Peter_Lely.jpg

JAMES II PAINTED BY LELY.   JAMES’  REIGN WAS ALSO TROUBLED LEADING TO HIM REPLACED BY HIS DAUGHTER MARY.

1.Whodunit The Suspects in the Case Helen Maurer note 30.

2.  Bones in the Tower Part 2 Helen Maurer Ricardian p10

3.  Pepys Diary Chapter 4 March 25 1663

 

 

 

 

 

Cutting Crime: The Role of Forensic Engineering Science – including the undoubted crimes perpetrated upon Richard III….

University of Lincoln

This talk on April 17, at the University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool Campus, Isaac Newton Building, Lincoln, might be interesting. Among other things, the study of Richard’s remains will be discussed. I quote:

“…the talk will discuss how this adds to our insights into stabbing attacks. Finally, the audience will see how the modern forensic techniques contributed to the investigation of the remains of Richard III…”

 

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: