By sheer chance I watched a programme about the discovery of King Richard III's skeleton. I could not make out why the archeologists had started digging in such an unlikely place as a car park. It turned out that some old documents showed that there had been a church on that site and it was known that after Richard had been cut down in battle his body was buried in that church and it described the exact location. Once the diggers had uncovered the walls of the church they were able to pinpoint where to look for the king's body.
They then had the task of finding a descendant to test for a match with the king's DNA. Amazingly they found one in Canada who had died but her son lived in England and the DNA matched! So this really was King Richard III's skeleton.
I found the programme most absorbing. The only complaint I have is that once again the only picture we are given of the story of the king's life and character was that portrayed by Shakespeare who liked a good story with plenty of villainy. There was certainly much villainy in the struggle for power and the throne at that time but it was not all on one side.
Now starts the question of where and how Richard should be reburied. After all, he was King of England and Monarchs of all shades of human frailty have been buried with pomp and ceremony. He deserves no less.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Ramblings of a nonagenerian (vintage 1923). Grew up in Lambeth in the 20s and 30s. Lived and worked in London during World War II. I have been attempting to do the Telegraph Cryptic Crossword since 1939! (My daughter says I *have* to write this, but I am troubled as it sounds so conceited.) I bought my first computer aged 85 and am continually frustrated by the vagaries of the technological age.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.