Thursday, February 21, 2008

Is that a javelin in your pocket?

Even though I am often diametrically at odds with the opinions expressed therein, I retain a fondness for the Torygraph, and its complete refusal to acknowledge the passing of Queen Victoria.

Earlier this week it reported that Hugh “Rubber Johnny” Despenser had been found. Astute readers (i.e. none of you) will recognise the name of Hughie from an earlier article here in which I reported that he had been nominated as one of the greatest 10 villains in British history. I had no prior recollection of him, and was a little surprised that he should accrue such opprobrium, but reading about him does tend to further the view that he wasn’t very nice.

The Torygraph must be alone in thinking that anyone has been searching for him. Reports of his public execution and the details thereof are readily available. This execution took place in 1326. Even his most loyal friends and relations have long since given up hope of his returning home, with a hair-raising tale of cheating death, and a healthy appetite. The faithful old cocker spaniel lying curled up on the hearthrug has long since ceased to whine whenever someone came to the door. We have all recognised that he has probably failed in his application at the pearly gates and been stoking the boilers in Hades these nigh on 700 years.

The Torygraph will probably be reporting in 700 years time about the finding of Lord Lucan. Not many of us will be here to read it, at least not in these bodies. Adam might – Adam, what is the life expectancy of your species?

Anyway, in somewhat startling language, the Torygraph describes old Hugh as “the gay lover of Edward II”. This is truly sensational. It also contains some redundancy, unless they mean “gay” in its traditional usage. At the same time, it is very reassuring. Never mind that Hugh was corrupt beyond the dreams of even a Conservative politician, was prone to torturing folk and that he allied himself with Edward II, who was one of the worst monarchs in the dizzying array of complete twattishness that has been the English royal family, no, much worse than all of that - he caught the other bus. The British establishment welcomes villains, psychopaths and mass murderers, but can’t abide poofters.

If you go to the report in the Telegraph, you may be startled to note the size of Hugh’s male member. It may well catch your eye. At least, I assume that is what is on display, some of you may be more habitual in your study of these things than I. When you have done this, you may like to search for images of Edward. (No, Adam, there are no movies). He is usually depicted with an unnaturally curly beard. These curls are the result of either over attention to cosmetics or an intimate act with someone well proportioned. In any case, the apocryphal manner of Edward’s death could scarcely have been more painful than joining in the games that he played with Hugh should you care to believe the Torygraph.

Edward’s most notable single achievement is losing the Battle of Bannockburn. It would be a bit like Chelsea being knocked out of the European Cup by Stenhousemuir. Of course, if you know anything about the rest of his reign you will note that he managed to piss off just about everyone, and was eventually deposed. His character could scarcely have been more different to that of his vanquisher at Bannockburn, Robert the Bruce, which is strange – they were probably related, both having the same middle name.

15 comments:

Dave said...

Thank you for a highly-informative piece, well worth waiting for.

Strangely, The Times failed to report this piece of news (or if it did, it was on a left-hand [and thus invisible] page).

KAZ said...

The article tells us that "Sir Hugh insinuated himself into the king's favour by backing him in his battles". Is this another way of saying he caught the other bus?
And at least Edward qualified for the battle of Bannockburn.

Richard said...

Robert Rubber Johnny the Bruce? or Hugh The Despenser?

Vicus Scurra said...

Dave. It was on the sports pages - in the hanging, drawing and quartering section, in between badger shafting and peasant taunting.
Kaz. Do you really think this is the place for cheap innuendo?
Richard. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Richard said...

You said they shared a common middle name. Maybe I missed something.

Vicus Scurra said...

Oh dear Richard. I had hoped I wouldn't have to do this.
Edward the Second.
Robert the Bruce.
Geddit?

Richard said...

Ah, quite. How stupid.

At least it wasn't Ringo Starr.

Geoff said...

Well-hung, drawn and quartered?

Vicus Scurra said...

Geoff, you could have been the court jester.

Homey said...

You have really outdone yourself this time. I laughed, I cried, it became a part of me.

You have presented History in a hilarious and entertaining fashion that will almost certainly capture the hearts and minds of the Nation for generations to come.

Despite your best efforts to further besmirch his legacy, in the end, Sir Huge DesPeniser will only be remembered for being Royal pain in the ass.

I hope this helps.

Vicus Scurra said...

Donn, of course it helps. I have updated your data on the little database that I have been compiling.

mike said...

Goodness me... but I thought that Eddy Two's main squeeze was Piers Gaveston. So he had more than one main squeeze on the go, then? I have never heard the like.

Sir Hugh does look like he's quite enjoying the experience. Or maybe it's just the gratification of flashing his ENORMOUS todger at the common fray below.

"Mm, the disembowelling does tickle a bit, but check out that schlong! NOT BAD!"

Vicus Scurra said...

Yes, Mike, you are correct. Edward was allegedly "involved with" Piers, and threw him over in favour of Hugh.
I can't imagine what the attraction was, can you?

zoe said...

I didn't know that they had buses back then. I've learnt something new here yet again.

Vicus Scurra said...

It is a pleasure to be of help, Zoe, and thank you for your kind words.
In certain parts of South London there are bus queues that date back to the time of King Edmund I.