Richard III & the Car Park

[Robert]

Harold was reputed to have sailed from Bosham on the fateful voyage that saw him end up in Normandy. There is a copy of the relevant Bayeux Tapestry segment in the church.

[Graham]

Excuse me for going of topic a bit, but talking of finding the bones of Kings, i hope that the remains of Harold of Wessex are found at some point.
I have no idea whether living relatives of last Anglo Saxon King can be traced; and should they be, they might be in worse condition than Richards if the Norman historians account of Hastings is accurate.

I believe I once read that the body of King Harold was so badly hacked about that he couldn't be identified by his face and that his wife identified him by a mark on his body which only she knew about....I wonder what and where that was? Don't think anyone really knows what happened to his corpse, but back in the 1950's or thereabouts there was an application, turned down, to open a grave in Bosham Church. Waltham Cross in Essex is another place mentioned as Harold's final resting-place. Or maybe he really did survive the battle and leg it to France, as legend once had it.

Graham

[Sally]

Richard III's reburial this weekend

Finally laid to rest amidst inevitable spectacle:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...d-iii-reburial

I predict a forthcoming flurry of hastily cobbled-together docu-dramas about the Princes in the Tower - at least.

[Chris]

Now members of serveral aristocratic families (including the Somerset family who are connected to the Beauforts) were tested regarding the parentage of Richard, and they found that his family links to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, were not as sound as the Yorkists made them out to be. But similarly the Tudors were found not to be as directly descended from the Plantagenets as they claimed (especially as one link was a relative of Richard and Edward IV). Which means that the original royal family died out in 1400 with Richard 11 (everyone since then should have a bar sinister on their escutcheons).

I think it's more a question that somewhere (or rather in at least one place) in the male line that goes back from Richard III to Edward III and then forward to an 18th-century Duke of Beaufort, there is a "non-paternity event". So it may not affect the descent of either Richard III or Henry VII from Edward III. In fact, it's more likely it doesn't, because most of the generations in the pedigree are later on.

[Beowulf]

I was quoting this from the first page and pointing out the DNA results ARE conclusive...

Hello everyone,
I suspect the DNA results will be inconclusive:the few remaining living cells will degrade and become mixed with other human remains at the site which is not as exclusive as royal tombs usually are. Also,the comparison DNA was not revealed as nuclear or mitochondrial, and i believe that one is more efficient than the other for this purpose.
Still, i believe it is Richard. The spinal deformity, which is closely associated with Richard, bieng identified on a nameless adult male body in that particular location seems beyond reasonable chance, unless such things were alot more common then than they are now.Lastly, it was noted that the skull showed signs of a massive trauma to the rear of the skull; i believe that Richard was felled by a foot soldier named Gardyner, or something similar, armed with a poleaxe. A grateful Henry Tudor knighted the fellow.

[Scorpio]

Excuse me for going of topic a bit, but talking of finding the bones of Kings, i hope that the remains of Harold of Wessex are found at some point.
I have no idea whether living relatives of last Anglo Saxon King can be traced; and should they be, they might be in worse condition than Richards if the Norman historians account of Hastings is accurate.

[Chris]

Here's a link to the scientific paper which has just appeared in Nature Communications:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141202/ncomms6631/full/ncomms6631.html

[Mayerling]

The DNA results are not only NOT inconclusive, they are making incredible headlines!

"Richard III's DNA throws up infidelity surprise"


http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30281333

Actually the DNA results are 99% conclusive that the remains were Richard's. What has come out is still astounding.

Richard was identified by comparing his DNA with that of two descendants of his sister's family. Now members of serveral aristocratic families (including the Somerset family who are connected to the Beauforts) were tested regarding the parentage of Richard, and they found that his family links to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, were not as sound as the Yorkists made them out to be. But similarly the Tudors were found not to be as directly descended from the Plantagenets as they claimed (especially as one link was a relative of Richard and Edward IV). Which means that the original royal family died out in 1400 with Richard 11 (everyone since then should have a bar sinister on their escutcheons). This actually includes the present royal family (almost nobody suggests removing them to locate some pure Plantagenet at this point). Apparently illegitimacy ran rampant in the British aristocracy and royalty at the time (and since) so that many Kings and Queens were the victims of "gossip" about their parentage. The only thing noted was that Richard's hair may have been blond and his eyes blue-grey.

Jeff

[Beowulf]

The DNA results are not only NOT inconclusive, they are making incredible headlines!

"Richard III's DNA throws up infidelity surprise"

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30281333

[Mayerling]

I am slowly making my way through this fascinating thread.

Phil, I just wanted to state that your knowledge of Richard III has been most enlightening for me. This is a fairly new subject for me, and your past posts on here have been so helpful.

I just wanted to ask you...if you could pick only one Richard III book that is the most helpful/least biased, which would you recommend?

Back to reading.....

Although it is outdated, Paul Murray Kendall's biography of Richard III was the best account up to about 1980 or so. Kendall's specialty was the period of the War of the Roses. Read his "The Yorkist Age" and his "Warwick the Kingmaker". And he also edited the relevant portions of the "Thomas More" biography of Richard III (the leading anti-Riccardian initial written source) and Horace Walpole's "Historic Doubts" regarding Richard the III (the leading original pro-Richard book). The book was entitled "The Great Debate". It was published as a paperback by W. W. Norton back in the late 1960s.

There is also the Josephine Tey mystery novel, "The Daughter of Time" [History] about a Scotland Yard detective recovering from injuries on the job, and looking into any old mystery (here the disappearance of King Edward V and his brother Richard, Duke of York, in the Tower of London in 1483). Based on early 20th Century sources it is really out of date, but a good read none-the less (as is Tey's take on the Elizabeth Canning disappearance in 1753, "The Francise Affair.").

Jeff

[Brenda]

.

I am slowly making my way through this fascinating thread.

Phil, I just wanted to state that your knowledge of Richard III has been most enlightening for me. This is a fairly new subject for me, and your past posts on here have been so helpful.

I just wanted to ask you...if you could pick only one Richard III book that is the most helpful/least biased, which would you recommend?

Back to reading.....

[Monty]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6S0ku1R9nE&feature=player_embedded

Monty

[Robert]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/16/richard-iii-died-battle-losing-helmet-new-research

[The Snapper]

Leave him be

His remains were carried to Leicester not York. Given that it was still possible that the bodies of the princes might yet have been found I feel it was a brave and significant act to take custody of the body. Their courage should not be belittled. He should remain in Leicester.

The Snapper

[Mayerling]

It was never about location. If the PA won, then it just meant a public consultation would occur, which may not favour York or Leicester.

Bottom line is, the PA had no legal or moral claim.

Monty

Hi Monty,

Do you think that Leicester Castle will have enough parking for the enhanced tourist trade, or will need more lots?

Jeff