The mystery of the lead coffin

By Mustang Bobby 

From the annals of archaeology...

Archaeologists were surprised when they opened an excavated stone coffin only to find another coffin made of lead inside. The team said they've never seen anything like it.

The remains of King Richard III were lost for centuries beneath a parking lot in Leicester, England, until archeologists discovered the site in Sept. 2012 and later confirmed the match. But other mysteries have been found, including a double coffin thought to have been sealed more than 100 years before Richard was buried.

Archaeologists returned to the Grey Friars monastery site in early July for more study. After several weeks of excavation, eight people lifted the lid off of a heavy coffin made of stone on July 23. They discovered that an inner coffin made of lead was sealed within the outer stone coffin.

The 7-foot-long stone coffin was thought to have been sealed in the 13th or 14th century. After its opening, the lead inner coffin was moved to the University of Leicester for researchers to analyze how to access it without damaging the remains inside.

This is how every scary movie about demons from the past being disturbed from their slumber starts. All we need is Brendan Fraser* as the dashing archaeologist and a score by Jerry Goldsmith.

*Or Harrison Ford or Stewart Granger, depending on your generation.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Two things I don't care about: The Royal Baby and Anthony Weiner's sexting

By Frank Moraes 

(Ed. note: I'm with Frank on this. I don't give a shit about the Royal Baby, other than to the extent that I care about human beings generally, because I loathe that silly family and stupid institution. As for Weiner, the way the media are reacting with a combination of prudish moralism, titillation, and hypocrisy almost makes me feel sorry for him. As it is, I don't care about the sexting, because I'd like to think I have a broad understanding of and appreciation for human sexuality. The problem there is the dishonesty, narcissism, and lack of judgment. I'm not sure that disqualifies him for mayor, but he does seem to be a shameless creep. -- MJWS)

I have no interest in the royal baby. In general, I have no interest in a royal family -- at least until the sons start killing each other in order to become king. To me, we had a war so we wouldn't have deal with this bullshit. And then when we created this country, we specifically didn't create our own explicit class of people who are better than the rest of us. It's all a big joke and people who are caught up in it really need to get a life.

The other thing I don't care about is Anthony Weiner's newest sex scandal. But I do care about how the Democratic ecosystem reacts to it. It isn't new, of course. We all know that when something like this happens to a Republican, they circle the wagons. Eventually, they may abandon the man (It's always a man!) in the middle of it. But they will assume the best and try to play defense. The Democrats are just the opposite—they have no loyalty at all. It doesn't matter if it's former IRS head Steven T. Miller or Shirley Sherrod or Weiner. Democrats might think that we should be understanding of the unnamed masses, but if it is a named person who is part of our team, they have to go.

Read more »

Archaeologists find Richard III: deformed, unfinished, sent before his time

By Michael J.W. Stickings

You'll know him from Shakespeare, if not so much from history, given that Shakespeare was playing loose with the facts, but oh, so quotable he was:

But I, that am not shaped for sportive tricks, 
Nor made to court an amorous looking-glass; 
I, that am rudely stamp'd, and want love's majesty 
To strut before a wanton ambling nymph; 
I, that am curtail'd of this fair proportion, 
Cheated of feature by dissembling nature, 
Deformed, unfinish'd, sent before my time 
Into this breathing world, scarce half made up, 
And that so lamely and unfashionable 
That dogs bark at me as I halt by them; 
Why, I, in this weak piping time of peace, 
Have no delight to pass away the time, 
Unless to spy my shadow in the sun 
And descant on mine own deformity: 
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover, 
To entertain these fair well-spoken days, 
I am determined to prove a villain 
And hate the idle pleasures of these days. 

This following the famous "winter of our discontent" line.

Well, much mystery has surrounded the end of Richard III, but it appears that at long last he has been found:

A skeleton found beneath a Leicester car park has been confirmed as that of English king Richard III.

Experts from the University of Leicester said DNA from the bones matched that of descendants of the monarch's family.

Lead archaeologist Richard Buckley, from the University of Leicester, told a press conference to applause: "Beyond reasonable doubt it's Richard."

Richard, killed in battle in 1485, will be reinterred in Leicester Cathedral.

Yes, poor Richard, such an ignoble end, killed in battle and ending up under a car park.

Read more »

Photo of the Day: Royal Wedding insanity 2

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Following up on my PotD post from yesterday...

The wedding is done. Over. But it's been hard to escape it today.

Even in Canada...

We have a federal election on Monday and yet our media have been swept up in the insanity across the pond, and all because this country is too pathetically servile, too disrespectful of our liberty, to cast off the British Monarchy for good, to toss it in the dustbin of our history, where it belongs. Even our most prominent journalist, CBC news anchor Peter Mansbridge, has been reporting from London. I find it all utterly revolting.

You can find photos all over the place. (Or you can just turn on the TV.) But here's another pre-wedding one. The insanity is palpable.

(Photo from The Globe and Mail: "Royal fans wait outside Westminster Abbey Thursday. The marriage of Prince William and Catherine Middleton takes place Friday in London, England.)

I'm embarrassed today even to have anything to do with Britain, even though my family lives there and I'm a British (and Canadian) citizen. It's a wonderful place, in many ways, a country I love.

And yet...

Photo of the Day: Royal Wedding insanity

By Michael J.W. Stickings

(We're going to try to make this a regular feature. So check back daily for Photo of the Day posts, usually around this time.)

Photo from The Globe and Mail: "A royal wedding fan prepares his overnight position on the pavement outside Westminster Abbey in London."

Have I mentioned, with so much attention on William & Kate and their impending nuptials, that I'm more ashamed than ever to be, as both a Canadian and British citizen, a "subject" of Her Majesty, and to be associated, even by nationality, with the masses of people who are obsessed with this stupid wedding?

And have I mentioned that I despise both the British Monarchy and monarchy generally?

And that, when it comes to Canada, the country I call my own, I'm a republican? It's truly shameful that our head of state is essentially a foreign monarch and that we kowtow, figuratively speaking (because we should never accept such submission), before an utterly ridiculous institution and an equally ridiculous family that has done nothing to deserve its position of privilege?

Well, there you go. Needless to say, I will not be watching the wedding on TV.

The absurdity of the royal wedding: monarchy v. democracy

By: R.K. Barry

Last night Lawrence O'Donnell, on The Last Word, did what I thought was a fabulous job of questioning America's interest in the upcoming Royal Wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton.

Frankly, I don't care what some people might want to do to pass the time. I'm sure I have hobbies and such that are of little interest to others. But O'Donnell wasn't simply talking about the fact that there are more important things to worry about. His comments were not of the more mundane nature that "some people waste their time watching the adventures of Snooki on the 'Jersey Shore,'" as much as that fact does amaze me.

Rather, he was making the point that America fought a revolution to toss out the British monarchy, a form of government based not on the democratic principles we profess to hold dear but on heredity. Monarchy is a form of government that expressly deems some people, by virtue of birth, better than others and thus fit to rule. This has historically justified the mistreatment of peoples all across the world simply because they were considered to be of a lower station and fodder to promote the glory of the select few.

If there is anything less consistent with the democratic political values that Americans claim to hold, I don't know what it is.

Perhaps you will say that this is no longer the case in practical terms - that the Royal Family is now just for show. But why, as O'Donnell argues, would we stand and applaud the wretched remnants of this pernicious form of government?

Unless, of course, many are not thinking about this in a critical way but simply want to enjoy a good party. I guess that's it.

Below are the comments made by O'Donnell followed by some hilarious remarks by Jerry Seinfeld. I encourage you to watch to the end.

(Cross-posted to Lippmann's Ghost)

Have I mentioned I don't much care for the British Monarchy?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, I know the Queen's on our coins. And, yes, as both a Canadian and British citizen, I know I'm supposedly a "subject" of "Her Majesty."

And I'm not quite sure what the alternative should be in Canada. (We need a "head of state," after all, not just a prime minister. An elected "president," as in Germany?)

But, honestly, I can't stand them.

(Actually, Charles is the only one I like. Sort of.)

And the whole William-Kate wedding saga is just irritating. As if we should care. (About Diana's/Kate's ring, about Kate's engagement dress, about what Kate will be called, about any of it.)

It's bad enough in Britain. It's worse when Canadians bow before such nonsense.

Are we really so pathetic a nation that we need the British Monarchy above us?

Photo from The Globe and Mail: "Britain's Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall visit Australia House to mark Australia Day, in central London January 26, 2011."

Hot, humid, exhausting -- plus, thoughts on the World Cup, the British Monarchy, and a few other things

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Toronto is an unpleasant place to be when it's this hot and this humid, and I'm sure it's the same for many of you suffering through this heatwave in the U.S. northeast and central Canada.

I'll be back to blogging tomorrow... er, later today, as it's already past 1 am. I'm just too tired to write anything.

So stay tuned for more from me and the team.

But first, a few thoughts:

-- I'm really looking forward to Germany-Spain tomorrow. That, to me, is the final. (Sorry, Holland.) And I, who has long rooted against our two-time World War enemy of the last century, can hardly believe that I'm rooting for Germany. What an exciting team. And it helps that it's a genuinely multicultural team that reflects the new Germany and that has incurred the wrathful opposition of the neo-Nazi far right. For some reason I can really get behind a German team filled with Turks, Poles, and Brazilians.

-- The Queen (Elizabeth II, that is) was in Toronto yesterday, at Queen's Park of all places. I'm a Democrat in U.S. politics, but I'm definitely a republican up here. I'd like to see the monarchy abolished in Canada. It's pathetic to see so many Canadians on their knees, so grateful that she came to visit us on our birthday, so thankful that she seems to care about us, as if she blesses us with her presence, as if her very appearance here proves our worthiness. Sorry, but I don't care to be her "subject," and I think this country needs its own head of state, and not just a governor general who acts as the Queen's representative. If Britain wants to keep the monarchy, fine, and, as a British citizen as well as a Canadian one, I suppose I support keeping the monarchy there, but we need to move on. (Yes, the Queen is deeply popular with many Canadians, and it's not clear what could replace the monarchy (an elected "president," as in Germany?), but today's Canada -- diverse, cosmopolitan -- doesn't need her anymore, if it ever really did, and much of the popularity is directed at her personally, not at the institution.)

-- How hilarious, in a sad sort of way, is this? A BP offshore oil drilling board game from the '70s, featuring "hazard cards" that read, "Blow-out! Rig damaged. Oil slick clean-up costs. Pay $1million." Really, you can't make this shit up. (I wonder if Dr. Evil came up with the $1 million figure.)

-- John McCain, you have clearly become a hollow shell of a human being. And that's putting it nicely. Have you absolutely no self-respect left at all?

-- Washingon v. Arizona over the latter's draconian anti-immigrant law? Arizona will lose. And rightly so.

-- Sign already, LeBron. Somewhere. Please.

-- Just got my seat assignment for Roger Waters' The Wall in Buffalo in October. Thirteenth row! Awesome. I can't even begin to express my excitement. (Yes, I'm seeing him here in Toronto, too.)

Alright, enough. Good night.

"Oh Camilla, you truly are my candle in the wind..."

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Guess who's currently on a (royal) tour of Canada? That's right, it's Charles and Camilla. Hoo-wah!

You non-Canadians (and perhaps even some of you Canadians) out there may not know that our head of state is actually the British monarch, that is, Queen Elizabeth II, which means that, for better but mostly for worse, we have to put up with the comic freakshow that is the British royal family.

I used to be a monarchist, that is, I used to support keeping the British monarch as our head of state (without any real authority), through a viceregal governor general appointed by the monarch on the advice of the prime minister, but no more.

I am British in addition to Canadian, and, well, I suppose I'm not opposed to Britain keeping its royal family, but what's the point for Canada? Tradition? But Canada is a nation that has evolved significantly over the course of its history, separating itself from its past, and from its British roots. A connection to Britain? But Canada isn't British anymore, it's a nation of two founding peoples (British and French) with a savagely brutalized third (Aboriginal), and it's now deeply multicultrual, even if its institutions and dominant cultural mores are still British? That connection to the Commonwealth? But who cares about the Commonwealth anymore? I don't.

I'm not sure what could replace the British monarch. A parliamentary system, which is what we have, should have a head of state more or less independent of the head of government (here, the prime minister). One option would be to elect a figurehead president, as Germany does, but that carries risks, such as the partisanizing of the office. So maybe we'll have to stick with QEII, Philip, Charles, William, Harry, and the rest of the madhouse simply because there isn't a desirable alternative. (And I actually quite like Charles, who does a lot of good, much of it unknown to most. He should certainly be king.)

Got any better captions?

(Photo from The Globe and Mail.)

Victoria Day 2009

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Happy Victoria Day to all of you Canadians out there. It's a beautiful day here in Toronto, the first (unofficial) day of summer, and I've actually been out tending to the lawn, gardening, and washing my car all afternoon -- and watching, from time to time, the Jays pull off the sweep over the White Sox.

Enjoy the rest of the May Two-Four. (Which this year falls early on the One-Eight.)

Oh, and if you'd like to look back on this national holiday of ours -- Quebec takes the day off but doesn't, of course, celebrate anything Victorian (or British) -- think about the Germanization of the British Monarchy, for Victoria was pretty much entirely German, and about the British Empire, for better and for worse, and about everything that is now understood to be "Victorian," for better and for worse, and about how crazy it is that a country like Canada, so British and yet so not, not now, still celebrates Victoria's birthday, and still has, as its head of state, a monarch who is not our own. (Am I an anti-monarchist? Do I think Canada should become a republic? Well, sort of, but no, perhaps not. Canada's not so bad the way it is now, even it means retaining as ours the soap opera that is the current British Royal Family, Victoria's descendants.)

Now excuse me, please, for I must go make dinner.

I'll have some new posts this evening.

-- Michael