Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

It IS Richard III: scientists find 15th century king's body

Page 1 of 3 [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

04 Feb 2013, 8:03 am

Quote:
It IS Richard III: Scientists reveal DNA results confirm 15th century king's body has been found under a car park in Leicester
  • University of Leicester academics unveil their findings at press conference
  • DNA sample matches that of a descendant of the king's maternal line
  • Skeleton's spinal curvature also matched accounts of the humpback king
  • Remains were uncovered by archaeologists at former church in Leicester
  • Historical records say he was taken to the city after he was killed in 1485
Human remains found buried beneath a social services car park in Leicester are those of Richard III, scientists confirmed today.

In an extraordinary discovery which rewrites the history books, the skeleton was identified by DNA analysis after researchers traced one of the king’s descendants.

Newly-released pictures of the remains show a distinctive curvature of the spine synonymous with the last Plantagenet king since Shakespeare immortalised him in one of his most famous works.



persian85033
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,869
Location: Phoenix

04 Feb 2013, 8:51 am

Incredible that they found him, although imagine having been buried under a car park?! A king! Maybe this will prove or disprove many of the things said about him, especially his appearance. They say that in some of the pics of him, it may have been distorted because of his reputation.


_________________
"Of all God's creatures, there is only one that cannot be made slave of the leash. That one is the cat. If man could be crossed with the cat it would improve the man, but it would deteriorate the cat." - Mark Twain


dyingofpoetry
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,202
Location: Fairmont, WV

04 Feb 2013, 8:59 am

Fantastic! :)


_________________
"If you can't call someone else an idiot, then you are obviously not very good at what you do."


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,655
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

04 Feb 2013, 9:12 am

I heard this on the radio this morning. This is quite interesting.



Yuzu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,169
Location: Bay area, California

04 Feb 2013, 11:31 am

It was a very timely discovery. They needed mitochondrial DNA for the analysis, which is passed by a mother to all of her children but only daughters can then pass it on to the next generation and since the last direct female descendants of Anne of York, (Richard III's sister) has already passed away, if her son and the other male relative who provided the DNA samples had died before this discovery it would have been very difficult to obtain any other credible DNA samples that can be used for comparison.



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 69,016
Location: Over there

04 Feb 2013, 3:41 pm

Incredibly interesting, and I sat spellbound as the BBC broadcast the press conference live - until they cut into it with some tawdry story about an MP who had been lying, and they never really got back to it. Fortunately it was available on-line but seems to have been taken down since then.

Best source is the university site, although not all details are published there yet: http://www.le.ac.uk/richardiii/index.html


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Feb 2013, 4:16 pm

How do they know it was not Richard III's identical twin?

ruveyn



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

04 Feb 2013, 4:42 pm

I reckon the arrow in the spine disabled him (paraplegic), then he was finished off with the hit to the head (that's often how it went down if someone was still alive back then on the battlefield and you were overrun and disabled).



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 69,016
Location: Over there

04 Feb 2013, 5:37 pm

^ This was later confirmed to be a nail, and not related to the burial.
http://www.le.ac.uk/richardiii/science/ ... ntsay.html


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


ADoyle90815
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 325

04 Feb 2013, 9:28 pm

This whole thing is fascinating. Then again, British history is one of my special interests.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

04 Feb 2013, 9:59 pm

Cornflake wrote:
^ This was later confirmed to be a nail, and not related to the burial.
http://www.le.ac.uk/richardiii/science/ ... ntsay.html


So, said nail wasn't near the body (it doesn't seem to say whether it was in him or not. Funny that they said it was lodged in his spine; that's a pretty big mistake)? So, bashed over the head.

I can see a bodkin point resembling a nail though, and that's what would be needed to get through the armor.



Yuzu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,169
Location: Bay area, California

04 Feb 2013, 10:37 pm

Not so interested in history but the DNA stuff is fascinating. 

One of the comments on the linked article had a good point. 

Quote:
What are the chances that the skeleton belongs to someone else with matrilineal ties to Richard III? Considerig how long his ancestors ruled England (over three centuries), it stands to reason that Richard already had many blood relatives amongst the general population by the 15th and 16th centuries. A certain percentage of those people would've shared mDNA through matrilineal descent from a common female ancestor. Have the researchers managed to rule out this possibility?


And someone else argued that:

Quote:
There is absolutely nothing from mtDNA alone that can demonstrate these bones could only be Richard's. That claim rests purely on the circumstantial evidence from the skeleton.


I know little about DNA testing, but am I correct to understand that these mDNA positive matching results are not enough to determine that these bones are definitely Ricard III's? 
So it could be from anybody with the same maternal lineage who lived in that era? 

I hope to find answers to these questions when they publish the detailed results. 



noxnocturne
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,693
Location: Harassing Muggles

05 Feb 2013, 12:55 am

Freaky, yet very awesome. :D



persian85033
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,869
Location: Phoenix

05 Feb 2013, 8:43 am

I wonder what kind of ceremony they will bury him with. He was Catholic, not Protestant.


_________________
"Of all God's creatures, there is only one that cannot be made slave of the leash. That one is the cat. If man could be crossed with the cat it would improve the man, but it would deteriorate the cat." - Mark Twain


Oswald06
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 31

05 Feb 2013, 11:16 am

Super creepy. My dog dug up a bone from our back yard a little over two years ago. Turns out my neighborhood used to be a pig farm years ago and my little puppy found one of the the pigs' bones. So far she hasn't found any other bones, thank goodness. :lol:



Acedia
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 489

05 Feb 2013, 12:47 pm

I wonder what his mtdna haplogroup is, and his Y-DNA.