Richard the Third

[Nick Armstrong]

I notice that there is an update on the Richard III documentary on More4 tomorrow night at 9pm.

Just to bump this up, the Update programme is on again at 8pm this evening:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/richard-iii-the-king-in-the-car-park/episode-guide/series-1/episode-2

[BBMmk2]

Thank you Cali for bringing this up, because I missed it last time and as i be staying in tonight, it be a gd excuse to to watch tv!

[Ferretfancy]

The update programme features the forensic work in more detail, and there is less emphasis on the Richard III Society's involvement. Interestingly, it mentions that another
descendant of the king has been found, and her mitochondrial DNA is also a perfect match. This is a very positive confirmation of authenticity.

[Nick Armstrong]

Interestingly, it mentions that another
descendant of the king has been found, and her mitochondrial DNA is also a perfect match. This is a very positive confirmation of authenticity.

... although not the definitive identification test for which Pabs was arguing in his earlier post:

The reason that mitochondrial DNA isn't so useful for identification is that it's not 'stereoscopic' - it comes from only one parent, so there isn't a second line that intersects to pinpoint an origin. What the results mean so far is that the skeleton is from the same female line as the two known descendants of Richard III. There are two other types of DNA - what you could call 'general' DNA (the overwhelming majority of it) that carries exactly half its information from each parent) and Y-chromosome DNA, which carries information only from the father. It is the analysis of the general DNA that will allow identification to take place, because the 'stereoscoping' will be possible.

But there was reference to the mitochondrial DNA being of a rare type ("Haplotype J1C2C"... he said, as if he knew what that meant)... hence increasing the probability of a match. And DNA investigation through the male line is ongoing.

The programme consisted of a lot of programme 1 being repeated in edited form to distill it to essentials, a good thing. It benefitted a lot from Ricardian Phillipa being to a large extent sidelined. A much better balance.

[BBMmk2]

This des sound like a better way round the programme., Unfortunately, I forgot to watch this last night, so I will have to catch up on this later today, hopefully!

[Nick Armstrong]

This des sound like a better way round the programme., Unfortunately, I forgot to watch this last night, so I will have to catch up on this later today, hopefully!

It's 'on demand' here: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/r...rk/4od#3488196

Or I'm sure it'll come up again on future days, if you scan the More4 schedule...

[aeolium]

... although not the definitive identification test for which Pabs was arguing in his earlier post

But surely there must be few who now doubt that the skeleton is in fact that of RIII. There is the circumstantial evidence of a burial in the remains of the Greyfriars abbey where he was reported to have been buried, the scoliosis, the results of carbon-dating, the presence of items indicating the burial of someone important, the presence of serious (and possibly fatal) wounds on the skeleton. And what would be the chance of a match on mitochondrial DNA with a living descendant of RIII's family if the skeleton was not in any way related?

[BBMmk2]

There's loads of eveidence with perfrect matches with this particular kind of DNA. Have you read the other posts here, by chance?

[aeolium]

There's loads of eveidence with perfrect matches with this particular kind of DNA. Have you read the other posts here, by chance?

Yes, I have. If that's so, why is mitochondrial DNA used frequently in identification of skeletal remains? The experts in the programme seemed to believe that it was pretty conclusive.

[David-G]

Just to bump this up, the Update programme is on again at 8pm this evening:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/r...es-1/episode-2

Thank you for the reminder, I watched this again and it was most interesting.

[BBMmk2]

I have just watched this update of Richard III. It does do a better job, less amateurish histrionics, and more of a scholarloy approach.

[Nick Armstrong]

Nobody expects.... the Church Police !!!

It's all getting rather nasty....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...hate-mail.html

[Flosshilde]

& even nastier in the comments

[Petrushka]

It's another Government cock-up. When ministers gave permission for Leicester University to do the dig I am confident that they never once thought it would actually happen. Now we are left with a most unsatisfactory situation. The Government must now take hold of this issue and make a definitive decision. The King may have been in Leicester for the past 500 years but I am becoming more sympathetic to York's case.

[Bryn]

It's another Government cock-up. When ministers gave permission for Leicester University to do the dig I am confident that they never once thought it would actually happen. Now we are left with a most unsatisfactory situation. The Government must now take hold of this issue and make a definitive decision. The King may have been in Leicester for the past 500 years but I am becoming more sympathetic to York's case.

No, no, no. Having arranged for the transfer of the body of Henry VI (for whose murder in the tower of London he is 'credited' with relaying the order) from Chertsey Abbey to St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, it is only fitting that he join his brother Edward, who ordered the murder, in that same resting place.