THIS WEEK'S FEATURE ARTICLES

---

Finding his voice
He’s been dead for over 500 years and he was 32 years old when he died. He was Richard III of England, and down the years his reputation has been that of a ruthless tyrant, a vile, child-murdering tyrant in fact. He was accused of poisoning his wife, Queen Anne so as to marry his niece. Shakespeare depicted him as a Machiavellian villain, clawing his way to the throne and slaughtering those who stood in his way. He was described as hard-faced, stunted in growth and physically deformed, a hunchback with
a limp and a withered arm, surely the very epitome of evil. When he was killed in battle he was savagely beaten about his head and body, even after a fatal blow by
a spear to the base of the skull did the job thoroughly. Slung naked over the back of a horse, he was interred without ceremony, his remains later believed to have been thrown into the River Soar.
End of story? Good riddance to bad rubbish? Many at the time would have thought so.
Twelve years ago a body was found beneath a car park and after much sleuthing and forensic examinations it was determined that these were indeed the remains of Richard III. Disregarding his dreadful reputation – or perhaps they were never convinced of it – historians and others took the opportunity to learn more of the man and his times. And in a special event where it will be revealed to the world they will reproduce his voice, giving everyone a glimpse into a era long-gone, a unique time-travel experience.
Was his reputation deserved?
Setting aside Richard’s physical appearance – after all, a perfect body never guaranteed anyone
a perfect nature – a look at some of the more colourful events of his short life give us a clue to his ugly reputation. He was never meant to be king, but after his elder brother Edward died and Edward’s children were declared illegitimate due his bigamous marriage, Richard was proclaimed the rightful king. Edward’s two sons were banished to the Tower of London and mysteriously disappeared.
They are famously referred to as the Princes in the Tower, and their disappearance and perceived murders were attributed to Richard. Reading through
a comprehensive account of his life in Wikipedia, it appears he was dictatorial, got the backs up of the rich and powerful in trying to improve the lives of the common people, and was perhaps a benevolent despot. It just depended on who benefited from the benevolence, and who suffered from the despotic. Two major rebellions were raised against his rule. Undisputed is the fact that he was clever and he was brave, commanding his first army at the age of 16. He was the last of the Plantagenets, followed by the Tudors, the last English king to die in battle, and his death marked the end of Middle Ages in England.
A significant figure indeed.
Why this project?
Perhaps the short answer is because they can. Richard is the first ancient person whose historical identity was proven by sequencing his genome – a 17th-generation great-nephew was found in Canada. The King’s identity is proven, and with a skull-shape relatively intact, albeit damaged, experts can determine which muscles were used for speech. He is of his era, and of his locality and his environment. Letters he wrote contain words spelled, as was the custom of the time, as the writer spoke them and reflecting the local dialect. Unlike Laurence Olivier’s ‘posh-voice’ portrayal on the big screen, Richard III would actually have spoken with a medieval Yorkshire accent.
Ten years in the making
On 17 November an avatar of Richard’s head will ‘speak’ about his son, in his own words from his own writings. It will be voiced by an actor who has undertaken countless hours of coaching to get as close as possible to how it would have sounded over 500 years ago. Different contemporary and current opinions of Richard III have surfaced. Perhaps he wasn’t as bad as we thought. He is said to have punished oppressors of the common people; that he had a great heart; that strangers esteemed him; that he was a good lawmaker. His skull would also seem to put the lie to ‘hard-faced’, the reconstruction describing
a face that was ‘young, warm, earnest and rather serious’. It seems nothing ever changes in the world of politics, and the politics of the world. Rivals will always seek to badmouth their opposition; supporters to build them up.
Follow that voice
My interest was piqued by Fran Kelly’s interview with voice coach Yvonne Morley-Chisholm on ABC Radio RN’s Saturday Extra program on 5 October. It’s still available if you are interested.
‘Voice For A King’ will be broadcast internationally from York Theatre Royal on Sunday 17 November from 11pm (AEST.) Richard’s bones were re-interred in Leicester Cathedral in 2015.
Judy Redeker

Months: what’s in a name?
Were you surprised to find it is October and ‘spring’ already? In our southern hemisphere you may even ask, “What season is it?” According to the CSIRO, “The Western four-season calendar, which divides the year into roughly four equal sequential phases (summer, autumn, winter, spring) is not a particular informative way of engaging with the weather and climate in Australia. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Australia’s first scientists, have always held a deep understanding of the seasons, and of how to tell when seasons are changing. Indigenous language groups from across Australia have partnered with CSIRO to co-develop seasonal calendars. They are important enablers for sharing and learning about Indigenous knowledge and management of Country… Indigenous knowledge of the seasons is highly localised and unique to each language group across Australia. As such, the number of seasons recognised in an annual cycle, the length of each season, and how they are locally defined and understood, differs a lot depending on where the seasonal knowledge of Country has developed.”
We are stuck with the western calendar, where October is the tenth month of the year with only two to go. But we then discover that October was not even always the tenth month of the year! If you think about it, octagon, octopus, most words that begin with the Latin prefix “oct” have some connection
to the number eight. But what about October?  Nicole Garner Meeker in Interesting Facts explains, “it wasn’t always that way. For the ancient Romans, who created the earliest form of the calendar we use now, October was originally the eighth month.” “The year began in March and ran through to December, with the first four months named for Roman deities. The next six months had more straightforward, numerical names. The remaining weeks (which would eventually become January and February) were largely ignored on paper. In the northern hemisphere when the harvest season ended, so did the calendar, until the next spring planting season rolled around.
“January and February were added around 700 BCE, and by about the middle of the fifth century BCE, they had become the starting months of the year. When Julius Caesar introduced the Julian calendar, he didn’t complicate things by adjusting the number-named months to more appropriate places. Some historians believe the attempts to rename October (and the other months of the year) were widely disregarded because the leaders themselves were generally disliked, though another theory might explain it best: Like many people today, Romans of the past just weren’t fans of change.”
Then we are on to November. Benjamin Plackett in his similar article Why is November the 11th month, not the 9th month? explains, “There are two theories, but the most likely blames forgetful Roman bureaucrats. November, the eleventh month of the year, actually takes its name from the Latin word for the number nine. July and August used to be named Quintilis and Sextilis, meaning fifth and sixth month, before they were renamed after Julius Caesar ... So why are these names all off kilter by two months?”
He mentions that there are two theories. “The first would have you believe that there used to be just 10 months in the Roman calendar. At some point, when they supposedly changed it to 12, the Romans added January and February at the front of the year, which pushed the other 10 months and their names off course. The second would have you believe that there were always 12 months, but New Year’s Day used to be March 1 and the last month of the year was February. But over many decades and centuries, through a series of bureaucratic and political changes, the New Year holiday simply drifted back in the calendar until it landed on January 1”.
Amelia Carolina Sparavigna, a physicist at the Polytechnic University of Turin in Italy, has conducted archaeo-astronomical studies to chart the precise lunar phases of ancient Rome’s calendars. Interestingly, under the 10-month theory, the months weren’t longer, she said. “The Romans simply didn’t bother to mark or measure the days in what we call now January and February because little to no agriculture happened in those months, and calendars at that time were developed primarily for farmers. After a gap in the winter, the year started from Martius,” she told Live Science.
Confusing isn’t it!
Marian Hearn

Scroll to Top