DNA confirms King Richard's bones

DNA analysis confirms — at least to a 99.999% probability — that the 15th-century skeleton found under a parking lot two years ago is indeed that of King Richard III of England, researchers announced Tuesday.

"Even with our highly conservative analysis, the evidence is overwhelming that these are indeed the remains of King Richard III, thereby closing an over 500-year-old missing person's case," saidgeneticist Turi King of the University of Leicester, who led the DNA effort.

source

Amazing what can be found of lost history in unexpected places.

Richard was buried unceremoniously after being brutally killed at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. He was the last English king to die in battle, and his death marked the end of the 300-plus-year Plantagenet dynasty and the beginning of the 118-year reign of the House of Tudor.

What did Richard do that led to such treatment and are there any lessons that may apply today?

I wonder if they will add his info to the ancestry DNA sites.

My question now is, does he have the right to a proper full blown royal funeral like Thatcher did (sarcasm)... now that they have identified him?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Not only that but you are missing the juicy part there seemed to be some hanky panky going on as his male line doesn't fit

Analysis of the complete mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence from Skeleton 1 shows a perfect match with the mtDNA sequence of one living female-line relative of Richard III and a single substitution when compared with a second living female-line relative. The Y-chromosome haplotype from Skeleton 1 does not match that of male-line relatives of Richard III, but this is not remarkable given that a false-paternity event could have occurred in any of the intervening generations.

www.nature.com...-information
More over there seems to be a bit of middle eastern genetic stuff in him so someone had some humus as a side dish.
In contrast to the Y-haplotypes of the putative modern relatives, Skeleton 1 belongs to haplogroup G-P287
Yiikes he is an Arab!!..not quite but he does carry genetic stuff from that area,incidentally I was thinking about making a post on a marriage of some minor British royal to a daughter of a Nigerian oil tycoon sometime back but decided to shelve it,I didn't care enough and I suspect most ATSers wouldn't care either not when we got our own snobby 1% to deal with.
How I beat the snobs, by Britain's first black marchioness, as she prepares to marry into one of Britain's most eccentric aristocratic families

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
For those who cares klik here^

edit on 3-12-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

How did they know what his DNA was in the first place?

originally posted by: learnatic
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

How did they know what his DNA was in the first place?

www.nature.com...
This link goes into some detail full study.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Was it McKays? HAHAHA. Really though, you'd think his army would've been able to recall where they buried their commander.

Amazing what can be found of lost history in unexpected places.

That was a turning point in the English saga coming out of the very poor dark ages and into the wealthy and more intelligent renaissance. Less direct action for the ruling class but far greater technologies and far deeper knowledge than ever before.

What did Richard do that led to such treatment and are there any lessons that may apply today?