The Dirtbag Wars of the Roses

by Mallory Ortberg · November 4, 2014

[Enter RICHARD, skateboarding]
RICHARD III: more like the house of Planfagenet
HENRY VII: I
what?
that doesn’t make sense
we’re all Plantagenets
it’s not Plantagenets versus somebody else
everyone’s a Plantagenets
RICHARD III: more like fagcastrian
HENRY VII: also that’s really unnecessary and offensive
RICHARD III: house of york?
more like house of dork
HENRY VII: that’s your own house
that’s
you’re not even being consistent with your homophobic slurs
RICHARD III: whatever
this party sucks
HENRY VII: THIS ISN’T A PARTY
IT’S A BATTLE
RICHARD III: if this isnt a party then why is everybody dancing
HENRY VII: I –
RICHARD III: look at that guy dancing
HENRY VII: he’s not dancing
you shot him full of arrows
he’s dying
RICHARD III: looks like dancing to me
ill shoot him again, youll see what i mean

 

roses4

EDWARD IV: ahhahaha yeah thats it
move his head up a little higher
i want his eyes to be exactly at the level of my dick when we cut his head off
so its the last thing he sees

 

MARGARET OF ANJOU: hey fuckos
my husband’s passed out
who wants a duchy

 

WARWICK: my lord I have returned from France
and the court looks favorably on a wedding with Princess Anne
it would consolidate your power in the–
EDWARD IV: oh i already got married
WARWICK: you what
EDWARD IV: yeah while you were gone
WARWICK: oh
EDWARD IV: actually like
before you were gone
WARWICK: oh
EDWARD IV: so you didnt actually have to go at all
WARWICK: will your marriage settle the question of succession?
EDWARD IV: oh my god no not at all
her name is Elizabeth and she’s literally nobody
WARWICK: why did y–
EDWARD IV: idk
she seems nice
itll work out

 

SALISBURY: honestly fuck all Richards, Edwards, and Henrys
YORK: even Henrys?
SALISBURY: ESPECIALLY HENRYS

 

Screen Shot 2014-10-28 at 10.02.54 PMELIZABETH: ah, Richard, all is lost
I have no hope for myself but please look after the boys
as Lord Protector I know you will
RICHARD III: boys, all is lost, got it
ELIZABETH: thank you

ELIZABETH: ah, Richard, thank you so much for keeping my sons safe in the Tower
I have come to take them home
where are they?
RICHARD III: what sons
ELIZABETH: my sons
the princes
RICHARD III: what princes
ELIZABETH: my sons with Edward IV
RICHARD III: sorry babe doesnt ring a bell
sure youre not thinking of horses or something

Mallory is an Editor of The Toast.


99 Comments

  1. winterbymorning +84

    Since we all enjoyed some gifs of T-Hiddles in the Dirtbag Prince Hal post, I feel it is my duty to bring you Bulbasaur Gingerthatch as Richard III:

    1. tubatoothpaste +19

      Ahaha yes! I’m happy to derail another dirtbag history post with Hollow Crown fangirling!

    6. RocktheDebit +23

      I see your initial wager and raise you Balthasar Gingerbatch (yes, I changed it) undercover as a dirtbag:

  2. houblonchouffe +10

    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA I CAN’T EVEN READ THIS YET AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

    1. Fazakerly +46

      It was five hundred years ago; I think the statute of limitations on spoilers has probably passed on this one.

    1. hussified +21

      I spend way, way too much time thinking about what would have happened if the Princes had managed to escape the Tower. Almost as much time as I spend trying to figure out who did it.

      1. summerestherson +37

        Have you ever listened to the Rex Factor podcast? They did a whole “whodunnit” episode about the Princes in the Tower and they pretty much just concluded that Richard had to have been complicit in some way. But they go over all the theories.

        (Also everyone listen to Rex Factor! It’s over now, but it’s two delightfully British dudes reviewing every English monarch and ranking them. It’s fun!)

        1. houblonchouffe +25

          Really? What led them to that conclusion?

          (fwiw I am firmly in the camp of Henry Tudor/Margaret Beaufort being the primary motivators behind the boys’ disappearances.)

          1. summerestherson +12

            IIRC, I think they came to that conclusion based on the fact that he had the best motive and opportunity, but I know there was more to it than that. I should go back and listen to it again. But I do remember them talking about the theory that one of the Princes (maybe Richard?) actually got out and lived the rest of his life as a bricklayer which I find hilarious.

          2. houblonchouffe +7

            I’ve heard that theory before (re: bricklayer–Richard of Eastwell) but I thought that was supposed to be RIII’s illegitimate son, maybe I’m conflating things, who knows.

          6. tinypaperme +6

            “More than ever Grant wonder with what part of their brains historians reasoned.”

            Signed, two MAs and Ph.D. in history who still wonders the same thing

          1. summerestherson +35

            Ah, yes, Rex Factor converts!

            So, they review every monarch from Alfred the Great to QE2. They do a quick biography and then give them points based on several categories: “Battle-iness,” “Scandal,” “Subjectivity” (would you want to be a subject during his/her reign?), “Dynasty” (how well did they secure the succession?), and “Longevity.” Then they decide whether they have that certain something that makes them truly stand out – The Rex Factor.

        5. sarapyle +6

          Also, my beloved Alison Weir wrote a slim book about whodunit (spoiler alert: she thinks R3 was definitely involved).

          2. sarapyle +4

            Same – normally she’s better at hiding when she just haaaaaates someone, but her distaste for R3 pours out and so I didn’t buy it completely. Me personally, I think he probably was involved to some extent, but IDK.

          3. houblonchouffe +13

            Oh yeah. She was not subtle about it at all.

            If RIII had any involvement, I think it would be far more likely that one (or both) of the boys died from injury and/or illness, or that someone Thomas Becket’d the whole scenario–got spooked and killed the boys not-exactly-under-orders-to-do-so.

        6. quotidianc +9

          Ooh, will check out the Rex Factor!

          Big Finish have a very silly Dr Who audio play on this topic, The Kingmaker, which I love.

          <spoilers>
          The princes turn out to have been girls and have embarked on a new life as bar wenches; the Doctor’s companions are forced to impersonate the princes in the tower, and Shakespeare is the villain.

        8. Steph +2

          I listened to the Alfred the Great episode of Rex Factor and it is super delightful! Thanks for the recommendation.

      3. bookwormV +31

        The Richard III Museum (it’s in York, in a gatehouse in the mediaeval city walls, and it’s amazing) allows visitors to vote for who they think did it, and puts the results on a whiteboard near the entrance. You are allowed to make your own suggestions, so a few people voted for Voldemort or Margaret Thatcher.

  4. Matt +143

    WARWICK: will your marriage settle the question of succession?
    EDWARD IV: oh my god no not at all

    Whole books have been written explaining the reasons for the Wars of the Roses, and yet that one exchange sums it up perfectly. Also, I’m pretty sure Edward IV spoke like that in reality

    2. bookwormV +22

      I read something once that said, succinctly, “Edward III had too many sons”, which is a pretty good summary of it all.

      1. bookwormV +11

        (Partner is DESCENDED from Edward III, though, apparently, via John of Gaunt, so I cannot be too cross about the many-sons thing.)

  6. catoclock +61

    Wait is saying the Wars of the Roses didn’t happen a thing now? Somebody help me out, I get all of my English history from sensationalist historical fiction

    1. editorialeyes +22

      I thought “Plantagenet” was a phylum or genus for the longest time. I did not learn a lot of English history in school.

        2. houblonchouffe +42

          Not far at all.
          Geoffrey, Henry II (?)’s father, wore a sprig of broom in his hat–the planta genista. The nickname stuck.

          1. MilesofMountain +11

            …why would anyone do that? I’ve seen a lot of broom in my time, it’s not exactly the type of plant that makes you think “that’s so pretty I wish I could wear it everywhere”. It literally looks like a scraggly green broom and it smells terrible.

          2. craftalchemy +6

            It’s distinctive when it’s in bloom, with the yellow flowers and all. The version of this story I heard was that it started as a way to tell your own side apart in battle when there was too much mud/blood/switching of sides to distinguish emblems.

    2. Matt +54

      There is a school of though that the Wars of the Roses weren’t anything more than a series of random battles, which were later connected in the imaginations of Victorian historians. For what little my opinion is worth, it’s just modern historians being contrarian so they can get on TV.

      Also, Victorian historians is great fun to say

      1. fireblargg +19

        The weird thing about that, is, you know, Shakespeare. If they were indeed random battles being connected in people’s imaginations, the people doing the imagining were certainly earlier than Victorians.

        1. Matt +24

          Hey, contrarians gotta be contrary, regardless of whether it makes any sense or not

          Contrarian Victorian historians, even

        2. Bryn (Plus Others) +5

          I know absolutely nothing about this but I have to say that the Google ngrams viewer certainly supports the idea that the *name* ‘Wars of the Roses’ suddenly became really popular with the Victorians. But my ability to do more half-assed research is hampered by a sick toddler sitting on my lap screaming, so…

          1. Asha +5

            I heard they called it The Cousins’ War back in olden times, which is fairly catchy in it’s own way.

  7. ppyajunebug +33

    Is this a place where we can celebrate Sophie Okonedo playing Margaret in the second Hollow Crown productions? Because YES DO WANT SO EXCITED.

  8. winterbymorning +77

    “He seems nice, it’ll work out” was p. much my attitude toward my own wedding and it has indeed worked out pretty great so far, so I feel confident in saying that’s a good basis for decision-making.

  9. Jacob +57

    “Dutchy” sounds like a teenage slang term that parents will read alarmist articles about. “Son, do you know what a ‘dutchy’ is? Do you kids give each other dutchies when we’re not around? Because we do not tolerate that in this house.”

    1. Matt +5

      It is exactly that. A few years ago, a terrible reggae song called ‘Pass the Dutchie’ came out, and the British press was full of scare stories that ‘dutchie’ was Jamaican slang for a joint

      2. Nimona +22

        It wasn’t, but it is now! From the Wikipedia article about Pass The Dutchie, which was a cover of a song called Pass the Kouchie, which was about drugs: “Dutchie is used as a patois term to refer to a food cooking pot such as a Dutch oven in Jamaica and the Caribbean. It has since become a drug reference in itself, denoting a blunt stuffed with marijuana and rolled in a wrapper from a Dutch Masters cigar, since American and British listeners assumed that the term was a drug reference.”

    2. mkpatter +10

      A dutchy (it might be spelled dutchie I have no idea) is a kind of donut here, cuz Canada.

  12. Gzortenplatz +42

    Clearly the first picture once had a skateboard under Richard’s feet, which must have been painted over in a vandalous act of historical revisionism.

  13. tubatoothpaste +8

    Oh hiiiiiii….
    Is that on Netflix or anything in the US right now? I started reading the book series, but I’d just finished binge-reading all of Philippa Gregory’s Tudor books, so I was too burnt out to get very far. I think watching the show would be much easier on my eyes & brain…

    Aw shit, this is supposed to be a reply to meetapossum

    1. meetapossum +4

      It’s not on Netflix. I don’t know if it’s on Amazon Instant, though. I watched it originally through less-than-legal means a while ago.

      1. redrobin5 +7

        You should find it though! I think the women are really well cast, especially Margaret Beaufort and Anne Neville. It’s beautifully shot-very early-early-modern eerie (it’s a style!). There is an appropriate volume of mist, the courts look luxe AND squalid, and Henry is a hunk.

    2. bottleredhead

      It is on Amazon Instant Video; I just finished watching it last week. It was delightful and also super fun for playing “what else have I seen him/her in?” I can’t remember if it was free or not though. I have Amazon Prime, but I feel like I paid.

  14. editorialeyes +10

    I saw a terrible production of Richard III years ago with Dirtbag William Hurt as Richard. He had decided that “speech impediment” and “disfigurement” meant “mumble all lines directly into shoulder that isn’t mic’d, rendering only every sixth or seventh word audible.” It was Art, I guess?

    1. EnchiladaTaco +26

      When I was in high school I went to London with my parents and we saw the RSC do Richard III, starring Some Obviously Very Important Theater Actor, who luckily managed to enunciate AND chew scenery like there was no tomorrow. It was delightful, and I resent Dirtbag William Hurt for making it less so for you.

    2. Unreadaethel +2

      I saw King Lear with Christopher Plummer, and we were sitting in the worst acoustic location in the theater. All I could hear was their thunder sheet.

      1. tinypaperme +6

        I sang William Walton’s Henry V with Christopher Plummer narrating and not only could we hear everything perfectly from the stage behind him, the angle of the stage lighting meant we could see the amazing quantity of spittle he produced and sprayed when he enunciated. It was like looking through a fountain.

        (This was in the 90s. He was still totally hot even then.)

    3. craftalchemy +7

      That is a shame, because Shakespeare’s Richard III is one of the greatest opportunities for overdoing it, verbal and physical, available to an actor. Why on earth wouldn’t you play it for all it was worth? I am sorry that Dirtbag William Hurt chose Art over scenery-chewing.

  15. deleted3602194 +2

    I know it’s a sad, sad mess, and have been known to cause violent family dinner discussions. But this is too funny. 🙂

  16. drashizu +8

    “[Enter RICHARD, skateboarding]
    RICHARD III: more like the house of Planfagenet”

    I’VE SEEN ENOUGH, NO NEED TO READ ON.

  17. Maryaed +4

    I think they should all beat each other up for not getting their references to some other dude with the very same name, though.

    GET A NEW NAME, FUCKER. THAT ONE IS TAKEN.

  18. The Elitist Semicolon

    "More than ever Grant wonder with what part of their brains historians reasoned."

    Signed, two MAs and Ph.D. in history who still wonders the same thing

  19. Craft (Alchemy)

    It's distinctive when it's in bloom, with the yellow flowers and all. The version of this story I heard was that it started as a way to tell your own side apart in battle when there was too much mud/blood/switching of sides to distinguish emblems.

  20. Craft (Alchemy)

    That is a shame, because Shakespeare's Richard III is one of the greatest opportunities for overdoing it, verbal and physical, available to an actor. Why on earth wouldn't you play it for all it was worth? I am sorry that Dirtbag William Hurt chose Art over scenery-chewing.

  22. The Elitist Semicolon

    I sang William Walton's Henry V with Christopher Plummer narrating and not only could we hear everything perfectly from the stage behind him, the angle of the stage lighting meant we could see the amazing quantity of spittle he produced and sprayed when he enunciated. It was like looking through a fountain.

    (This was in the 90s. He was still totally hot even then.)