Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

King Richard III dug up and displayed in Leicester, England

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:28 AM
link   
A body found under a car port in Leicester, England has been confirmed to be that of King Richard III of England. The intact skeleton, displaying a fragile but complete skull, seems to be consistent with the DNA of Richard's bloodline as well as consistent with the wounds suffered in the decisive batter of the 30-years war. The spine of the skeleton is curved, as Richard''s was known to be, and a metal arrowhead was discovered in the King's back.

Source:

www.latimes.com...

(no reason given)
edit on 4-2-2013 by Aleister because: new source




posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Just to clarify, as the OP seems to imply they just "found" the body, that they were hunting for his resting place for a few years and using all the evidence available, deduced he was most likely buried there, which led to the subsequent dig and discovery of the body...

All in all, a good example of investigative archaeology



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:34 AM
link   
I don't understand how you lose a King.

Was the battle that intense?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:36 AM
link   
The King who lost his life but inspired William Shakespeare's epic play has again seen the light of day. There is a website devoted to this find, which hasn't been updated with the news from the press conference as of now but will probably contain that soon,

at www.le.ac.uk... .

I would like to be a fly on the wall at actor Al Pacino's home right now. Pacino loves the Richard III story as written by Shakespeare, and produced and acted in a movie about the play and the character, "Finding Richard". Well, they likely have found him! Alas, there was nary a horse in the grave.

To learn more about the King, who died in 1485 after holding the crown for two years, the good folks at wikipedia have kindly agreed to let us read their peer-reviewed document:

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 4-2-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Just to clarify, as the OP seems to imply they just "found" the body, that they were hunting for his resting place for a few years and using all the evidence available, deduced he was most likely buried there, which led to the subsequent dig and discovery of the body...

All in all, a good example of investigative archaeology


True, and regrets over any confusion. The discovery was anticipated, but to actually find a body, and then do the tests to determine its name and heritiage after so many centuries, is remarkable and must have been exciting for all involved in the dig and subsequent confirmation.

("A skeleton of a horse, a skeleton of a horse, my kingdom (a parking lot in Leicester) for the skeleton of a horse")
edit on 4-2-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
I don't understand how you lose a King.

Was the battle that intense?


He lost the War of the Roses @ the Battle of Bosworth (a battle they can't even decide on it's exact location - which didn't help finding his body) and, as a result, he wasn't given the proper burial rights but rather just had his body abused and given a rather substandard burial near the battlefield by the victors.

He was then vilified by the victors and the later Tudors so as to make him appear like a bad King and justify them taking the crown, when in actual fact he was a decent King and able administrator who did good things for the development of the Kingdom...



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:01 AM
link   
They found him only a few months ago
There's a documentary on it tonight
Channel 4 in the UK called Richard III: the King in the car park



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by GezinhoKiko
 


Thanks for the heads up. Will try and watch it.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:33 AM
link   
God save the King!

Richard III was a much maligned man, history being written by the victors. Maybe one or two myths can be laid to rest by an examination of his bones, and then his remains can be interred in the more suitable manner in accordance with his status as a king who lost his life on the battlefield.

If they have compared his DNA to descendants to determine if the remains are those of the king, then who are the people we could rally behind to sweep out the Germans (and alien lizards) sitting in Royal Palaces at the moment?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Rob37n
 


The descendents of Richard are from Canada and the Plantagenet family he is from was originally French-Norman.

It is pointless and actually rather ignorant, not to mention somewhat bigoted, to call the current Royal Family, Germans. They are no more German than I am Irish.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


The last warrior King of England to die in battle deserves one heck of a funeral.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 

I know that this has been discussed in parliament so I would think that he would get a state funeral as befits any other English monarch.
Still think he should be buried in York though.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


You are, of course, entirely correct. I apologise unreservedly to Germans everywhere. What I meant to say was shameless parasites.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


And the only King of England to die in battle aside from Harold of Godwin


Although not the last British King - that honour falls to James IV of Scotland who died fighting the English when Scotland decided to invade us in support of the French...



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ironorchid
 


Yeah, it is a bit of a spit in his face to bury him in Lancaster!!

For those that don't know, he died during the War of the Roses, which was between the House of York (Richards family) and the House of Lancaster (who became the Tudors)..

It's like burying Napoleon at the bottom of Nelsons Column in London!



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Rob37n
 


Parasites?

Do explain........



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Lancaster?
That's crazy
I live in Lancaster


Where in Lancaster would they lay him to rest?
The only place I can think of would be the Priary Church next to the Lancaster castle



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by stumason
 


Lancaster?
That's crazy
I live in Lancaster


Where in Lancaster would they lay him to rest?
The only place I can think of would be the Priary Church next to the Lancaster castle



He was found in Leicester, so I don't know why they'd transport him to Lancaster. Did he live there at some point? A summer home? I expect, like one poster said, that they'd have a state funeral and bury him with other Kings and Queens. That should be quite a show.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GezinhoKiko
 


My apologies, I had been told by a work colleague he was to be buried in Lancaster - turns out he was mistaken and he is being buried in Leicester...

I would have thought though the proper place would be York Cathedral - that is where he was based and held court.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Did anyone happen to see the picture of the skull? I'd swear he was a Habsburg.





new topics

top topics


active topics

 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join