Comments on: The big dig: Richard III

By: Susanamantha

Susanamantha — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:22:38 +0000

For a compelling look at Richard III read Josephine Tey’s most excellent mystery, Daughter of Time.

(Miss Tey was one of Britain’s best writers and one of her novels, Brat Farrar, was broadcast on PBS Mystery years ago. Unfortunately, it was never released on VHS, much less on DVD. The book is one that I re-read every couple of years, same with Daughter of Time.)

I learned so much about the English monarchy in the middle ages, its intrigues and scandals during the War of the Roses. Miss Tey’s novel inspired my joining the Richard III Society, dedicated to reinstating Richard’s good name and removing the taint of murdering his nephews.

By: neo-neocon

neo-neocon — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:55:41 +0000

OlderandWheezier: good one.

By: DonS

DonS — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:12:58 +0000

My recent reading has been a book on the Wars of the Roses. But I haven’t gotten to Richard III yet . . .

By: OlderandWheezier

OlderandWheezier — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:36:44 +0000

Got a chuckle at the link/caption to the story made by a commenter at Patterico’s site:
“They paved Plantagenet and put up a parking lot.”

By: vanderleun

vanderleun — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:46:08 +0000

Not just the deformity but the DNA:

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

By: rickl

rickl — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:29:02 +0000

Also, it’s not so much that the remains were preserved, but that they were positively identified as a specific individual; or at least beyond a reasonable doubt.

The scoliosis helped, I’m sure. What are the odds that another individual with the same deformity who suffered trauma consistent with battle wounds was buried in the vicinity?

By: Brian Swisher

Brian Swisher — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:09:25 +0000

It’s not so much that his burial site was lost as it was destroyed. He was interred in (IIRR) the Whitefriars monastery in Leicester. During the Dissolution of the Monasteries, the place was looted and his tomb broken open. It had been assumed that his body had been thrown into the River Soar, but obviously that turned out not to be the case…

By: rickl

rickl — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:58:06 +0000

carl:

The skeleton is only 528 years old, which is pretty young by archaeological standards. Bone lasts a long time under almost any conditions.

Much rarer are remains with soft tissue preserved, like “Ötzi the Iceman” who died more than 5000 years before his remains was found.

By: carl in atlanta

carl in atlanta — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:35:38 +0000

This story is fascinating. Has anyone heard anything about how-why the skeleton was so well preserved?

By: bobbl

bobbl — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:31:53 +0000

Richard III has been maligned by history because of two Tudor -favorable accounts. Thomas More’s history and Shakespeare’s play, both written to please their Tudor rulers; Henry VIII re More and Elizabeth I regarding the Bard. Richard has been falsely and unfairly accused of killing his two nephews and, separately, their Father, Edward IV. Nothing could be further from the truth. As regards his brother Edward IV, Richard was a devoted and true advocate. Nor did he kill Edward V and his brother, the “Princes in the Tower”. Henry Tudor, who killed Richard at Bosworth on August 22, 1485, and became Henry VII and his son, Henry VIII have truly spun History in their favor by having his “Historians” re-write the truth so he would look to be the savior of a England by disposing of a “Bad King”, the truly honorable Richard III, the last Plantagenet.