WHAT HAPPENED TO KATHERINE HOWARD’S BODY? Missing royal remains. Six wives documentary. Tudors
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 авг 2023
- She’s the DISAPPEARING QUEEN but how did Queen Katherine Howard vanish from her final resting place? Henry VIII’s fifth wife was executed alongside her lady-in-waiting, Jane Boleyn, Viscountess Rochford, on 13 February 1542 at the Tower of London. It has always been said that both were buried in the Chapel of St Peter Ad Vincula next to Katherine’s cousins, Queen Anne Boleyn and George Boleyn (who was also Jane’s husband). However when the floor in front of the altar was excavated by the Victorians in the 1870s in order to carry out restoration work on the Chapel, no bones belonging to Katherine were found, though Anne and Jane were both located. The disappearance of Katherine Howard was explained by the theory that her bones must have dissolved in lime due to her youth at the time of her death and this idea has been accepted by many ever since. Modern science has proved it to be false however. Lime does not speed up the decay of a corpse, it retards it and therefore it cannot explain what happened to Katherine Howard’s body. So what other reasons might explain the complete absence of her remains? In this six wives documentary from History Calling, we go back to the original sources to study this Tudor mystery in more detail, starting with the death of Katherine Howard, what we hear about her burial and then asking, what happened to the body of this infamous Queen and might we ever find these missing royal remains? Is she one of the famous historical figures who is buried at the Tower of London, or is she not? Possibilities I’ll discuss include whether the bones of Katherine Howard were stolen, if she was buried somewhere else, if she decomposed naturally, or if the Victorians simply missed her.
Amazon storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/historyca...
Instagram: / historycalling
Patreon: / historycalling
OTHER VIDEOS YOU MIGHT LIKE:
HOW OLD WAS KATHERINE HOWARD?
• How old was KATHERINE ...
THE FACE OF JANE BOLEYN?
• The face of JANE BOLEY...
DEATH OF KATHERINE HOWARD AND JANE BOLEYN
• DEATH OF KATHERINE HOW...
CATHERINE PARR’S CORPSE
• CATHERINE PARR’S buria...
DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN AND OTHERS
• DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN...
SIX WIVES OF HENRY VIII PLAYLIST
• Six wives of Henry VIII
TUDOR MONARCHS’ PLAYLIST
• Tudor monarchs
DEATH, MURDER AND CORPSES’ PLAYLIST
• Death, murder and corpses
GEAR USED
DJI Drone: amzn.to/38h1vXr (UK LINK) OR amzn.to/39hROZm (US LINK)
Go-Pro Hero 10 camera: amzn.to/3EPIK9U (UK LINK) OR amzn.to/3rTWScL (US LINK)
GoPro 3-Way 2.0 (Tripod/Grip/Arm): amzn.to/37CdC1r (UK LINK) OR amzn.to/3vaVxjU (US LINK)
Memory Card: amzn.to/36QvcOQ (UK LINK) OR amzn.to/3KeLZZs (US LINK)
Microphone: amzn.to/3rYtjH8
BUY OR RENT:
The Tudors, season 1 amzn.to/3rFmveg (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VCwQ0j (US link)
The Tudors, season 2 amzn.to/3m64HIn (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VMPnHw (US link)
The Tudors, season 3 amzn.to/3wiwPwi (UK link) OR amzn.to/3BijsPB (US link)
The Tudors, season 4 amzn.to/3rNeggF (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z16S58 (US link)
Henry VIII and his Six Wives (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3jiCkag
Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3hd93vd (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wH2mr2 (US link)
LEARN MORE:
[FREE] Eline M.J. Schotsmans, Katrien Van de Vijver, Andrew S. Wilson and Dominique Castex, ‘Interpreting lime burials. A discussion in light of lime burials at St. Rombout's cemetery in Mechelen, Belgium (10th-18th centuries)’ in Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, vol. 3 (September 2015), pp 464-79.
www.sciencedirect.com/science...
Gareth Russell, Young and Damned and Fair: The Life and Tragedy of Catherine Howard at the Court of Henry VIII (2017). amzn.to/3xldHhi (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VExTgg (US link)
Josephine Wilkinson, Katherine Howard: The Tragic Story of Henry VIII's Fifth Queen (London, 2016). amzn.to/3x7MxdO (UK link) OR amzn.to/3rbFuPj (US link)
David Starkey, Six Wives: the Queens of Henry VIII (Vintage, 2004) amzn.to/3k9uD4Z (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wImKIh (US link)
Antonia Fraser, The Six Wives Of Henry VIII (2nd edn, Phoenix, 2009) amzn.to/3atiEfi (UK link) OR amzn.to/36IqD5r (US link)
Eric Ives, The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn (Wiley-Blackwell, 2005) amzn.to/3xLivgr
THUMBNAIL: Metropolitan Museum of Art, public domain
Creative Commons licenses used see creativecommons.org/licenses/
NB: Links above may be affiliate links. This means if you make a purchase through one of these links, I earn a small commission. It in no way affects the price you pay.
What do you think happened to the remains of Katherine Howard? Let me know below and remember to check out my Patreon on www.patreon.com/historycalling and my Amazon storefront at www.amazon.com/shop/historycalling
I'm afraid her bones are lost in the the reburials and the fog of time
I think she's buried somewhere near the altar. They just missed finding her.
I just don't think that anyone cared much mostly from from fear and then from forgetfulness. Poor girl.
I'd watch the heck out of a video about Olga of Kiev
I believe 3 of your theories could be correct.
1. The fact that they only dug up a small area, her bones/body could of been missed .
2. Her bones could of been mixed with other burials.
3. Grave robbers.
But like you said, we probably won't know unless the king gives his permission to dig up the floor unless it's in disrepair.
It is so interesting to me that the dead bodies of the executed where given more kindness than the living people were. I have always felt so sorry for poor Queen Katherine Howard. She was a pretty young pawn in a terribly dangerous game. Of all the queens she was probably the least suited to such a position or to be able to humour Henry. I suspect her body is in the chapel, perhaps even undisturbed. I hope so.
Yes, hers is one of the most tragic stories of the era. She really never stood a chance, poor thing. It seems like nearly man in her life was using and abusing her :-(
@@HistoryCallingthat's unlikely she was abused and more likely a clumsy claim to save her life. Unpleasant marriage into an unsuitable positionfor sure but it's dangerous for history to apply post modern values to rewrite the narrative.
@@MsJubjubbird I mean there's a reason why these modern values exist because we realised past one's were wrong
@@mythanita4292 that's over hundreds of years. And in the future people won't agree with our values today. There's even a difference already between generations. But people are shaped by the society around them and society is shaped by the knowledge available. When you don't know how the world works because there aren't scientific advances then people use religion to explain things and hence shape society. Change is gradual.
It’s jarring to realize the bones of historical figures like Henry’s wives have been juggled around, dispersed and removed to places unknown throughout the ages! Nonetheless, we still revere those people - obviously more than Henry did. Even now we retain an emotional tie to them. Rest In Peace to all 💐
Thank you for correcting the common theory that quick lime dissolves a decedent. It was used for disinfection and odor control. Catherine was also estimated to be of an age where her bones were fully formed. They would not be soft enough to simply disintegrate. Even the bones of infants don't do that (I’m a funeral director, not a grave robber, just to clarify). Lastly, the methods for estimating the age of individuals, based on the study of their bones, have advanced a lot in RECENT years. It is perfectly possible that the gentlemen who examined the disinterred remains were incorrect in their guesstimate about the age of the bones they believed to be Jane Boleyn. I see no reason to suppose Catherine isn't present in the chapel the same way her cousin, Anne Boleyn, is.
Thank you. I didn't know about the misinformation about lime myself before researching this, so I was even correcting earlier videos I've done where I mentioned it in passing. I wonder too if the ages were incorrectly determined. Sadly I don't think we'll ever get answers to these questions. :-(
I wonder how many people get lye and lime confused/crossed over in their minds, especially when thinking/talking about how it affects the way a body breaks down? Maybe not as much in older times, when it was more commonly used, but I'd put money on a majority of modern folks not knowing.
Thank you once again for this video! Is it possible that Henry was so humiliated by her that he ordered the destruction of her remains or removal to an unrecorded site? He would have been the only one with the authority to do so plus the ability to punish anyone who disclosed what happened.
This is quite plausible
Doesn't seem likely. She already didn't exist in Henry's mind. I think it also might have called too much more attention to the fact that she had betrayed him for his taste.
He was still the king...just look at the damnatio memoriae he ordered with regards to Anne Boleyn. Almost nothing of her existence survives@@edithengel2284
Seems very likely.
The misplacement of the grave marker indicates to me how Catherine's execution was more about shame than politics, as Anne's was. That she was lost somehow says a lot about the attitude toward her at the time in comparison to Anne
Yes, it's interesting too that Katherine's execution is so much more poorly documented than Anne's. We don't even have a good account of her final words. She just wasn't deemed as important as Anne was, then and now I think. :-(
I think Anne's death was about anger and hate. People never like people who are mirrors of who they actually are instead of who they tell themselves they are. He also was angry that she didn't give him the son he wanted.
@@HistoryCalling Why was King Henry so much more angry with Dereham as opposed to Culpepper who such a worse committed betrayal?
@@amyjoyce2301 I believe the prevailing theory is that Henry viewed Dereham more as the one who had 'spoiled' Katherine, particularly given the question around whether he and Katherine were precontracted. The very fact that he was prosecuting people for things that happened well before the marriage and having to retroactively make them crimes suggests that a lot of his anger was about the idea that when he met Katherine she was not the virginal rose he'd thought her to be, as much as about any alleged adultery.
dereham was considered a commoner, and culpeper a noble due to his job as a courtier of the privy chamber and one of henrys closest advisers, hence dereham suffered a worse death@@amyjoyce2301
really reminds you how young she was when she was executed. hearing how they described her bones as being not fully formed really is sad and tragic. just a child still 😢 i’m on par with you as far as grave robbing and disinterments, it seems unlikely every bit of her body would be gone but then again i suppose people never cease to amaze us!
it's even just sad to think of her being married to such an old, disrespectful coot as a child, even if she thought it was a good idea at the time. we all make unwise decisions as youths and it's tragic for people to have to be chained to those terrible choices made as young as 16 for their whole life- or to have life cut short because of it.
It would not have been her choice. At that time women had that decision made for them by their elders.
Would you consider doing a video about Queen Claude at all? She seems like such an interesting person for how short her life was
She was indeed interesting, but I don't know if she could carry a video. When I stray from English/British royalty people just aren't interested for some reason, even though other royals are so interesting as well. My videos on Marie Antoinette and the Romanovs just crashed and burned for instance :-(
@@HistoryCallingThat’s so stupid that people only click in English (mainly Tudor) history videos! It deprives creators and viewers of some really good content
@@HistoryCalling- I didn’t know you had videos on Marie Antoinette. RUclips’s algorithm just keeps showing me your Tudor videos.
@@lfgifu296 Agreed 💯
I for one would love to see an in-depth on The Hapsburgs.
As I've said (probably too often), one of the things I love most about this channel is that the act of measuring the event becomes as interesting and important as the event. I first heard most of these names when I was eleven, in the sixth grade, and even then, I always wanted to know how we know what we know. By listing and evaluating your sources for us- (can I coin a phrase? 'Verbal footnoting'...)- you include us in the complete thought process and invite interpretation. Working in film, I always firmly believed that if you respect your audience, they'll rise to it, and respect and appreciate you. This goes for journalism as well, and your work here is as both historian and journalist. As I read the comments every week I think they validate my theory. There's a reason you have such a good community.
THANK YOU SO MUCH (yes you're getting an all caps thank you as that was such a lovely comment). I really appreciate that as that's exactly what I think too. You see too many people dumbing down to the lowest common denominator in all sorts of fields and I am dead set against that as I think it leads to a dumbed down society. Like you, I think that if you set the bar high (or higher at least), anyone who's serious about history, or in your case quality films, will meet you there. Anyone who wants the most basic, idiot-proof content should just move on from my channel, as that's not my style. Anyone can regurgitate a Wikipedia article (and plenty do), but I think to do well on RUclips you have to provide something different and in my case, as the line on my homepage says, my 'thing' is a focus on original sources. Being able to track down and analyse such sources is also something any real, trained historian should be able to do as well and it's a dead giveaway of a pseudo-historian when they can't do it. I also like the little phrase 'verbal footnoting'. Now of course I'm not able to list everything I use, but I try to explain what the major sources are and get people to think about how reliable they are/aren't as too many people just blindly believe something they read if it was written down a long time ago and it's just not that simple. Anyways, thank you very much again and have a lovely weekend :-)
I agree, thank you for being such a thorough and reliable source for history videos, and encouraging people to use their noggins! 😊
I’m with you and Occam: the simplest explanation- she’s still there but beyond the scope of the last investigation’s boundary.
Katherine Howard is my 1st cousin 15x removed, and I have recently discovered that the only one of Henry VIII's wives that I am not related to is Anne of Cleeves.
I think Katherine Howard’s body is in the chapel just misplaced or scattered. At the time the chapel was repaired, I have serious doubts about the forensic science available to correctly identify all the bodies/skeletons. And it seemed to have been a crowded spot.
Yes, it is indeed very crowded. You really need to see it in person to appreciate how small the area is that all these people are meant to be buried in.
The one that really bothers me the most is the countess of Salisbury, her father, her brother and herself were all executed, it’s absolutely horrific, I know they were all executed unfairly and I feel for them all, but the countess just breaks my heart💔 she was an old woman who was tormented her whole life purely because she was a Plantagenet!
She's my great aunt x,s 17💔
@@shadow_hillsgrandma8224 oh wow that’s fascinating!! How exciting!
Her father wasn’t executed unfairly. He was guilty of trying to overthrow his brother not once but several times. His brother forgave him multiple times but still he kept doing it. Innocent people lost their lives because of his actions
@@cherrytraveller5915 your right! Yes he was the kingmaker!
Margaret Plantagenet was possibly the most tragic character of this period. She was impoverished by the death of her loyal husband, wholly dependent on the beneficence of the Tudor Court, and butchered at her execution. A true reminder that women had zero power, zero agency and despite that lowly status, women were still a threat to men.
Rest in Peace, Maggie. You deserved a better life.
So sad that Jane is labeled as Lady and not Queen. She was by all accounts Queen for 9 days and even though Mary stripped the title from her it does not change facts that Jane was named Queen.
She should be Lady Jane Dudley, even if one does not think she is a legitimate queen. I suppose few would recognize her under that name.
Maybe at the time there was more value in having a coronation. Jane never had one.
@@edithengel2284She was an unfortunate pawn in others games.
She was not however a real Queen , but through no fault of her own a traitor. This was the machinations of her family and a sick young man terrified of Catholic heirs. The legitimate daughter of the King was the rightful heir.
This was so interesting - this is why I so wanted to be an archaeologist and/or a paleontologist. (My father wasn't having it.) I love research, I love learning. I love a good mystery and I think making discoveries is just about the most exciting thing there is. So many possible scenarios - hopefully, some day, they will figure it out and find her. I have to admit, the thought of how much disrespect there was for the dead is disturbing to me. Great video - thank you!!
I'm so sorry your Dad wasn't supportive. I think an archaeologist and/or a paleontologist is a perfectly respectable career. I'm surprised he was so against it. I hope whatever you ended up doing, that you enjoy it. I love the mystery element to history as well. It's like a treasure hunt :-)
You can be whatever you want, it's your life. Tough noodles on your father not liking the idea of you becoming Indiana Jones. Caring parents should be supportive on anything their child does that requires learning & dedication, such as becoming an archeologist. You don't need to be young neither. Many middle aged people switch careers.
@@Moebian73 My father is not a caring parent, and that's all I'll say about that. I'm retired now (63), but I get my history fixes wherever I can!! I love going to museums, too!! I don't think I could handle the field work at this point... LOL! 😏😁 Thank you for your kind and wise words!
@@HistoryCalling I was good in math and he would only pay for college if I would be a math teacher or a CPA, which I didn't want to do. But, I ended up working for insurance companies for 30+ years and insurance premiums are algebraic equations. So, I ended up doing math for a living anyway. LOL!! I think that's what you call irony... 😏😁 I get my history fixes on TV, on YT, in museums, wherever I can!! Videos like this one fascinate me!!
I wanted to be a teacher, but my mother wouldn't have it. So now my Therapy dog and I volunteer in a program where children learn to read by reading to the dog. So I guess I've become a teacher after all. 😢
Many thought provoking points. I always thought there was only one reason for Catherine's absence and that is that her young bones dissolved fast due to quick lime. Didn't think there was any dispute in it.
Fascinating to think she could actually still be there undisturbed and the fact that her burial details and location were never actually confirmed by trustworthy sources but yet there was a floor plan drawn up.
I thought it was confirmed like Anne that Catherine was placed in the chapel.
There's not really any doubt that she was placed in the Chapel, but the spot wasn't recorded as it was with Anne. If she does lie undisturbed, all the better for her. Those who were disturbed usually ended up having bits of their skeletons stolen by ghouls. If Richard III had been found before let's say the mid-20th century I reckon his bones would have been so badly mishandled, we'd never have been able to find out all the fascinating information about him that we did. The first thing to be nicked would probably have been the misshapen vertebrae.
On a visit to Hampton Court a few years ago, the guide told us that the long gallery we were walking was haunted by the ghost of Catherine Howard who ran screaming along that gallery. Believe it or not! It certainly felt eerie after that announcement was made!
@@helenkaye2662 We are convinced we encountered her spirit there too on a school trip many moons ago. It was really eerie.
@@HistoryCalling I agree. I had wondered how feasible it would have been for any living descendants/relatives to be DNA tested although I appreciate there are many generations since the killings and of course Katherine never bore children so it would be even less clear in terms of DNA profiles.
@@helenkaye2662 Yes, It's a well known and well told tale if you believe in the paranormal that Catherine haunts the Long Gallery. It's said when Catherine was being arrested and taken away, she broke free from the gaurds and ran down the long gallery and banged on the chapel doors begging to speak to Henry who was at Mass. The guards caught up and dragged her away screaming. I don't think there is any trustworthy historical evidence that this actually happened though.
A few years back a RUclips video emerged of a ghostly video caught on camera opening and closing security doors at the palace setting off the alarm. It's said to be the ghost of Catherine or possibly Henry but it looks fake really as the clothing on the ghost is not of the Tudor era.
The fact that Katherine's remains were not found is truly puzzling. Given the fact that the burials were obviously disturbed prior to the 19th century restoration makes almost anything possible aside from the dissolving body theory. A thought just occurred to me . . . was he floor of the chapel dirt in the 16th c. or did they just lift the paving stones for each burial? Another great video as always. It's so unfortunate that many viewers interests are so limited that your videos that stray from the Tudor period don't do well. Bummer!
Paving stones I believe. I've never heard any talk of it being dirt. As the Chapel Royal in the Tower (then a royal residence), it would have been only the best. Yes, it continues to be annoying that non-Tudor material is such a weak pull. The last 4 videos flopped which was very disappointing, but what can you do?
Did the two videos about the Neville sisters flop? Those were excellent!
I hope not!
Hi HC, another fascinating and well researched presentation, so thanks for that.
Poor Katherine, things have gone against her in life and in death.
I think that she is there somewhere. Either just outside the search area or her bones have become mixed with others in the lack of space in the chapel.
I assume Henry would have wanted Katherine quickly buried and forgotten about, doubt he would have had her buried elsewhere in the Tower as this would have made the grave unique.
Such a sad ending.
Thanks again for bringing this to us.
Thanks James. Yes, I think whatever's left of her is in there too, though we may never know where exactly. Yes, she was a real Tudor tragedy, her and Lady Jane Grey.
Let’s face it, Katherine Howard had a difficult life and death. She suffered from neglect because of the huge family she was born into and after her mother’s death her dad was off begging for financial assistance and sent her to live with his step mother. We know about the neglect and the sexual abuse that she suffered while living with her grandmother who comes off as being very uninvolved and distant to Katherine and the other girls who were entrusted into her care to educate and train for their future lives. After her short marriage to a monster who was the king of the double standard and tragic execution she appears to have been neglected in death too. This poor girl couldn’t seemingly catch a break! My heart aches for her.
Question for you: Although permission to disinter the bodies before the altar at St. Peter ad Vincula again might never be forthcoming would ground penetrating radar or other recent technologies help to locate where all the bodies/bones are buried? I’m not sure if that’s even possible, but if it were that might help solve part or all of this riddle.
A most interesting and perplexing conundrum. Make no bones about it!
😆😂😀 Now that made me smile.
Thank you. Interesting take on poor Katharine's missing body. I don't have a solid opinion but since grave robbing was common in the past, could it possibly be that the robbers were attempting to retrieve Anne and removed Katharine by mistake? There was no way of knowing which bones and remains belonged to whom and even if there was, I doubt anyone who profited by grave robbing would have that degree of knowledge. Just a thought
Nothing is impossible of course and I certainly think that bits of Anne were stolen when Hanna Beresford was put in, but it would be tricky to break into the Tower and do all of this without anyone noticing and then there would be all sorts of trouble for the perpetrators. It could be an inside job of course, but it would still involve a fairly significant group of people and one of them would surely talk.
I think with all the movement around her over the years, she has simply moved away from her original position. So, she may be a few feet under where she should be, or in any direction. As you said, all of the bodies in the chapel near the alter have been moved around so it stands to reason that she has simply been moved about in the process, probably without anyone noticing.
Again, great video :-)
Thank you. Yes, I think she's probably still in there somewhere as well and like you say, she may have ended up in a slightly different position from where she started.
I've been diving into my family history, and the Duke of Norfolk (Katherine's uncle) was my 12th great grandfather. I'm now down a rabbit hole of tudor history videos
The Tower's Chapel of St. Peter ad Vincula is not large, and as you showed, the altar area is small. I was there last month from the U.S. (have now visited all Six wives' graves) and I was ... well, dismayed at how all those people were just stuffed under the slab there.
I'm being blunt, but it is obvious that 'squeezed' isn't correct. Stacked, perhaps? Nope. Let's face it. There were a lot of bodies stuffed under there.
So now, in addition to sympathizing with the horrific plights of innocents like Lady Salisbury, Anne and Catherine, et al, we can add the crude dumping and mistreatment of their remains. 😢 Good. Grief.
To be honest, I wonder too how they're all supposed to fit in there. I can certainly see why Anne's remains ended up heaped together in a pile and it wouldn't surprise me if some people are elsewhere in the Chapel that we think are under the altar. Unless you were putting them in standing on end, there just isn't room. It's not like in Westminster Abbey where there are big vaults under the floor.
That criminal Henry the HATE sick my stomàch. Whenever he wants to get rid of someone, he makes up a bag of lies. Whenever I read the history of this murderer, my heart goes to the many innocent people who prrished under his natorious, criminal rule!!!
Yup, Henry was not a nice guy, though I always say the Russian Romanovs make the English, even the Plantagenets and Tudors, look like kittens by comparison.
@@HistoryCalling I Love your channel very much. The time and effort you take in researching the history of what happened in years gone by and presenting it to us is incredible, but I don't agree with you re the Romonovs. Their fate had to do, I believe, with politics and although their downfall was horrible I don't believe It was anyway near the 72,000 British people Henry the HATE murdered, which included his very good friends. He had absolutely no respect for women either and to this day it is the same way some men treat women with violence. History teaches us many things and we should take heed and live good. Look at a man such as Hitler, he murdered millions because of hate and that happened in my lifetime, look at slavery of black people by the British?? The list goes on and on. These people who hold power believe they're are God Almighty instead of doing good for their people!! Keep up the awesome work you are doing and my love and respect to you❤️❤️❤️
Excellent video, not sure how I missed this when it posted. I completely agree with you that the simplest explanation is the most likely.
I love ur narration. This channel and Hannah's royal history are my absolute favorites.
Imagine if everyone buried in St Peter ad Vincula’s Chapel rose up as ghosts for a night.
It would be a mixture between the Tudors and the Jerry Springer Show. You’d have Anne Boleyn and Lady Rochford throwing hands, Somerset and Northumberland trying to pull each others beards off, Thomas Cromwell facepalming over these stupid aristocrats killing each other, while Jane Grey is crying in a corner in the living embodiment of the “Mom, pick me up I’m scared” meme from Mean Girls
I sense an historical novel topic :-)
Loving your stuff! Thank you!
I'm so stoked to catch this today! And a video in my favorite series (tombs/funerals/burials/disinterments) no less. Thank you for all the wonderful work you put into all your videos; your commitment to primary source citation and accuracy to the best of your abilities is singular on this platform. Hoping for a video on Margaret Pole too some day! Or on more of the Stuart monarchs, like Mary II and Anne or even another segment on Charles I (a 'how he lost the throne ' like you did for James II; I've rewatched that one like nine times).
Thank you so much. That was a really lovely comment to read :-) I do have a video on Anne Stuart's children, if you haven't caught it yet. I find the Stuarts very interesting too and wish people were as enthusiastic about them as they are about the Tudors.
Another excellent video. Thanks for making these.
THANK YOU SO MUCH for being so generous and donating to the channel. I'm really glad you enjoy the content. :-)
Thank you for an incredibly interesting video. I love how you don't dumb anything down and you site which sources are credible and incredible. I think the Tudor videos are more popular at the moment because more and more people are discovering Six the musical and are wanting to know more about Henry VIII's wives.
Thanks Jade. I just saw Six a few months ago myself actually and it was surprisingly historically accurate.
@@HistoryCalling Thank you. I just went and listened to your podcast on it now thanks to your comment. I would love to see it but unfortunetely it is not curently coming to my country, South Africa.
I think Queen Katherine is still there, probably muddled up with other people. If her bones haven't been muddled, then she is deeper in the ground, probably under Jane Boleyn. The grave diggers would likely have dug just 1 grave and put the first to die in the bottom, cover her over with soil and then put Jane on top. This is a common practice even now. My grandma is under my grandad, as she died 10 years before him. One thing is for sure, you are a long time dead, so make sure you are put in a good spot! 😢
Yes, she might well be deeper. I too have family members stacked up to 4 deep.
I’m leaning toward the theory that she’s still there, just not in the position she was expected to be in, and thus was missed in the previous excavation. Too bad the monarch wouldn’t give permission for the bodies buried there to be analyzed, catalogued and reburied in a purpose-built vault in the chapel. I think that, after all these centuries, whatever their supposed offenses against the Crown were, they can be forgiven and afforded some measure of honor and a decent burial.
I suspect she's still in there too. I think to built a new vault though might destroy the 16th century building. Maybe at some point more restoration work will be needed and we'll get some additional answers to our questions about the likes of Katherine's remains.
@@HistoryCalling Yeah, I guess the foundation wasn’t designed to accommodate all those burials under the floor, much less for a vault (even a small one) to be built under the altar!
It's wild when you think how close to the exterior walls some of these burials are meant to be. I mean surely that would have totally undermined the integrity of those walls? Katherine herself was meant to be right up in the top right corner of the Chapel for instance.
Oh, how I hope future King William IV allows for additional studies!
@@catherinefrazier2478 He'll be William V- we already had William IV 1830-1837, after his brother George IV & before his niece Victoria. He didn't have a major impact on history though, & ofc he's totally overshadowed by Victoria, so he's kinda forgotten.
I always found the "she totally disolved because she was young" kind of confusing, just because I know bones of similarly aged and younger people have been found... I think your opinion is most likely, she's there, they simply missed her.
Yes, that was really odd to me too. I knew next to nothing about how lime affects bodies until I researched this and was quite blown away by the fact that it actually does the complete opposite to what the Victorians (and many since then) have assumed.
I agree that she's still in the "mosh pit" around the altar. Burial anywhere else or removal of Katherine's remains would have generated a great deal of rumour and speculation or some sort of legend about where, exactly, she actually is. The excavation was done in an era of scant technology, and -- of course -- the main purpose was to restore a floor, not do an archaeological dig. It's a sad ending to the short, sad life of a most unfortunate young woman. Katherine Howard's story always tugs at my heart; she didn't have much of a childhood, and she was used by her family once she became a valuable asset.
Yes, it's hard to know who to feel worse for, her or Jane Grey. Probably Jane I suppose, as she was even younger and did absolutely nothing wrong while we could argue that Katherine made some very silly decisions (still nothing like enough to deserve what she got though).
@@HistoryCalling Jane did have a coldness to her though like Edward VI and her opinions were quite eye opening for one so young. Had Jane lived and got to reign we could've had the Protestant version of Mary, she could've been a little tyrant like Edward VI was shaping up to be
@@Shane-Flanagan Agreed; very possibly as fanatical as Mary & Edward. I admire Jane a lot- very smart & educated & dedicated, & refusing to give Guilford a crown makes me crack up & go "you go, girl!"- but I also wouldn't want to get on her bad side, which I absolutely would cos I'm not even Christian, let alone a fanatical Protestant: the letters she wrote to Mary are _wild!_
@@HistoryCalling I find it very hard to criticise Katherine at all- largely cos she wasn't cruel to anyone; the worst you could say is she cheated on Henry, but I'm not 100% sure she could've refused to marry him (& I find it _impossible_ to have any sympathy for that evil scumbag), but also cos I can imagine myself making similarly stupid & impulsive decisions as an immature, boy-crazy teenager.
@@beth7935 Hey Beth, my cat loving mate! 😺 🐈
Sad news. I had to put one of my cats to sleep last week. A tabby cat. She was 16 and rapidly losing control of her toilet movements not to mention her balance. She was like that for a long time so we finally decided to put her out of her pain and misery. She also couldn't turn back to groom her back fur which kept getting dirty and tatty etc. I'd say she must of substained some sort of injury climbing in and out of a car engine or something.
I wasn't really sad about putting her down as looking after her could be taxing at times as you can imagine but now that she is gone I do miss her presence around the house especially when I look down at her bed or when I glance down at her spot at the end of the garden. Also she was so loud always roaring about something lol. Always had to get the last word lol.
The vet sent us a sincere sympathy card and a poem called Rainbow Bridge in the post a few days ago. It was a thoughtful and nice touch on their part.
So now I have only one cat left, her mother who is 17 and still very fit and alert by comparison.
I'll stick with one cat for now but possibly may get a black kitten for Christmas. I love black cats.
Great video. TY.
Thank you as always HC, I think she is in the Chapel, Katherine's bones were outside of the area they were looking as was George boleyn's bones, I think your spot on with your theory HC. 😊👍
Thanks Simon. Yes, it's the simplest answer and I find those are usually the best. It would have been hard to bury her right in the corner of the room anyway as it surely would have undermined the structural integrity of the walls.
Another fascinating story HC, thanks as always
Thanks Babs. Glad you enjoyed it :-)
I know how horrible it sounds but giving these people their faces back imo would show them respect.
I have heard somewhere that Henry VIII had Katherine's remains entirely covered in quicklime for a rapid decomposition, and found that utterly barbaric; cruel. Because she was found guilty of adultery, it caused a deep narcissistic injury despite he himself being a notorious adulterer, as many kings were, and he wanted her quite removed from the world. As a result, he ordered quicklime to cover her remains so that it was as if she never existed.
Did you watch the video? They mentioned that theory and why it is unlikely since it is untrue that it would lead to complete decomposition but rather would even help to skeletonise the remains.
Very good. Thank you.
fantastic video, many thanks
You're very welcome. Glad you enjoyed it :-)
Oh boy, I feel you would solve all my family mysteries & brick walls in one fell swoop! I think you must be one of the hardest working people in the/whichever realm! ❤
Thank you! Great job
Thanks Nathan. Have a great weekend.
If the body of Lady Jane Grey (aged 16 at time of death) was found, that would indicate that the body of Catherine Howard (aged 18+) would be there to find.
I don't think they found Jane though (but I also don't think they looked - they really just wanted to stabilise the floor. They were actually aiming to disturb as few of the remains as possible).
Always brilliant insights which can cause lost of sleep! My only question is: when will the mystery woman who creates these episodes publish a novel filled similar events and characters analysed in her work?
Thank you for another wonderful Tudor episode, only slightly ghoulish, but hopefully enough so to garner lots of likes! After listening to all the theories, but before I heard your final conclusion, I was already leaning toward the idea that Catherine is actually there, but just slightly out of position according to the Victorians' expectations. I recall that Richard III was almost not found because those in charge of the excavation had the wrong idea about where to look. I also felt generally a bit skeptical about the approach used in the 19th century, since we don't know why some of those unidentified bodies were determined to be of no significance. Who knows, perhaps some day a method will be found to scan effectively under more recent structures without disturbing them, in order to study ancient sites, and then this diminutive and tragic royal personage will at last be found.
Thanks Ann. Yes, some non-invasive techniques might reveal some additional answers, but I'm not holding my breath about that being allowed. Yes, I remember hearing too that had the trench been 6 inches to the side, they'd have missed RIII.
@garyallen8824 It wasn’t QUITE that simple if you read a bit further.
Awesome video!
Glad you enjoyed it :-)
It’s such a small area for so many people. But, I think she’s buried there. Unless, she was so hated and Henry said to put her somewhere else, she’s probably there.
OMG. How(ard) weird. I have been getting all kinds of suggestions this week via the algorithm on wifey number 5. Am I missing something like an anniversary somewhere. Thanks for the post HC - love learning new Tudor 'stuff'. 😊
No, no anniversary. Perhaps you just watched something recently to do with her and the algorithm assumes you want more?
@@HistoryCalling No not recently. Sat on my gluteus maximus (both of 'em) watching cricket on the tellybox! 😳
Then at this point, I would say the algorithm can probably just read your mind. :-)
aw heck yes, the highlight of my friday is here!!
Thank you so much. Enjoy and come back and let me know what you think happened to her when you're done :-)
@@HistoryCalling Just finished! I think you're probably right - if they weren't buried in coffins or anything, the instability of the ground (that eventually necessitated renovation) may have caused bones and bodies to migrate from their original locations, give or take the accuracy of where the bodies were supposed to be at all. Katherine is probably somewhere 'offstage' of the renovation area like George. Though I will admit, until this video, I didn't know lime was a preservative and not a destructive agent on the bones, so this new thought of mine is all thanks to you!
Thank you. I didn't know about the lime either and it blew my mind. :-)
Happy Friday HC!!😊
Thanks Holly. You too. Hope you enjoy the video :-)
Thanks for notifying to check. I have subscribed, and checked in the last week to verify, and it was unsubscribed today.
Thanks! Wonderful video!! Catherine was used for others gain and I feel so sorry for her. Not knowing exactly where she is buried seems a double insult. 😢
THANK YOU SO MUCH ELVERTAW for so kindly donating to the channel. I agree it would be nice to know exactly where she is, though I doubt we ever will sadly :-(
@@HistoryCalling sadly. But maybe someday some one will discover something and then historians and history enthusiasts will have something else chew over!!
Fascinating stuff!
Thanks Katherine :-)
I think the simplest explanation is correct: they probably just missed her, as she was out of range of the area being repaired. I feel certain she is still under there somewhere.
Excellent as always. I get the impression that the various burials under the alter are in soil, rather than than there being a vault under the pavers. Is that correct? If so, one really has to wonder how a grave robbing could have taken place - you'd not only have to lift the stones but dig. Some combination of the chapel and Tower personnel would have to have been in on it. This isn't some church in the provinces or a despoiled monastery, passing through the hands of centuries of benign neglect or civil war - it's the Tower of London. Your supposition that the spot just wasn't correctly identified seems most likely to me.
So interesting. Thanks.
You're welcome. Glad you enjoyed it :-)
I was just thinking about this exact thing just today!
Great minds think alike. Now you can have the answer :-)
Would you consider making a video on Judge Jeffries? I have been quite interested in him after I read M.R. James stories ('Martin's Close' and 'The Rose Garden') where he was depicted as a villaneous character. I think he's a ghost in one of those stories, too. He seems to be quite infamous and I'd personally like to hear more about him.
Hi, awesome live history video I enjoyed it. How are you doing? I'm doing well. All your history videos are always enjoyable. Have a great day see you next video greetings from Canada 😊
Thank you. I'm good. Just looking forward to the weekend and the promise of some sunshine 🌞
I agree with your assessment Queen Katherine is in the chapel and missed during the repairs done in 1876.
I have been to the chapel. I think she is still there. Her bones are probably mixed in with others. Great video. Have a great weekend
Thanks Delia. You too :-)
Sorry this is slightly off topic, but I’ve been meaning to ask you.
1. Have you done a video on Edward VI’s tendencies to be like his father in regards to being a tiny terror and a tyrannical?
2. I know you don’t give your name or show your face for good reasons, I surmise. I must ask though, have you ever written/published a book or an article you wouldn’t mind sharing with us? Again, I respect your privacy & it’s your decision how much you share with us. I appreciate it all. Especially bc you go directly to the original/contemporary source, if possible.
You and Reading the Past (Dr. Katt) are my two favorite history channels. Thanks again! God bless. : )
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR GENEROUS DONATION TO THE CHANNEL and kind words. iI have a video on Edward's life which I put out a couple of years ago (probably most easily found by looking in my Tudor monarchs' playlist). I don't have anything specifically on him being a little tyrant, but didn't Dr Kat cover that topic recently? I don't follow her, but I could have sworn I saw it in my suggested videos and I don't intentionally copy other people's ideas (although plenty steal from me, but that's another story), so that would rule that one out for me I'm afraid. I did publish a book, a couple of articles and a chapter in an edited volume, plus some little things like blog entries and book reviews back in my academia days, however I'm afraid I can't share details of them without giving away my name and so I've just had to suck it up and accept that I can't promote them here. The more time I spend on the internet, the more certain I am that (for now at least) I want to protect my privacy. There are just too many weirdos and I don't want them showing up at my door or bothering me in other ways.
@@HistoryCalling Yes you are correct, the great Dr Kat did a video recently on her RUclips channel Reading the Past about tiny tyrant Edward VI
I loved the rear view of the Chapel. I've never seen the view before!
Amazing how much thought you put into these videos. One thought I had, if she was taken by tomb raiders, maybe they had no clue who they were taking. But I see no reason for them to take anyone, as they would be caught if they tried to sell or display any of these people
Thank you. Yes, I can't see tomb raiders being able to do this. It would be so much easier to get bodies from a rural cemetery, even famous ones. Breaking into the Tower of London, then into the Chapel, then having to spend hours digging up the floor and removing bones just doesn't seem worth it at all and you'd never be able to prove who you had. I also think any unauthorised digging of that nature would have been reported (as it would have been so scandalous) and that we would know about it.
Superb investigation, HC! I tend to agree with you; the excavators probably missed her remains. You've mentioned the Spanish Chronicle more than once; I'm wondering if you at least find it entertaining to read despite its inaccuracies. 🤔
THANK YOU SO MUCH STEPHEN. Hmm, yes I suppose it can be entertaining but on the other hand it's time consuming to always have to mention it and explain why it's rubbish, just because I'll get people who think it's accurate criticising me if I don't.
@@HistoryCalling 😆😆 Of course! Point taken.
The bones said to be those of Anne Boleyn are described as a female with short neck and square jaw in Allison Weir's book "The Lady in the Tower". Since Anne is always described as having a long neck, perhaps that body is actually that of Katherine Howard. Some writers have suggested that Anne's body was smuggled out of the Tower and buried elsewhere. Who knows? Wherever these ladies' bodies are lying, I hope their souls are at peace.
Another excellent video! How did the execution site come to be regarded as the green close to the chapel (where the memorial is today) , as opposed to the site between the White Tower and the Jewel House, which seems to have better documentation?
This is just a story I read on the internet, so don't take it as gospel, but apparently Queen Victoria visited the Tower once and asked where Anne etc. had been executed and the embarrassed yeoman (or whoever she was talking to) didn't want to admit he didn't know, so just pointed to the front of the Chapel. I will say though that although Anne, Katherine etc. weren't killed there, some Scottish highlanders were in the 18th century. See my video on the glass pillow memorial for more details.
Hey there, I love your videos! I read something that I'd like your opinion on as a possible video topic: Was Anne Boleyn behind the posioning/attempted murder of John Fisher? In Alison Weir's "The Six Wives of Henry VIII" she speculates that it was probably Anne, but I can't find confirmation of this. Thanks for all your great content!
OMG, I totally accepted the lime explanation & had no clue it was a myth! Even though I've watched/read about lots of gory stuff like that! Fascinating! I totally agree that the most likely answer is she's there somewhere, most likely off to the far side like George, or muddled with or hidden by all the other bodies crammed into such a tiny space. It's not like anyone was overly concerned about treating executed traitors with respect.
Don't worry about it. I never questioned it either until I was researching this and it blew my mind :-)
I totally agree with you. And I also very much doubt that any monarch of the present dinasty will allow the search and verification of this and so many other cases.
Thanks!
THANK YOU SO MUCH JOE for your very kind donation to the channel. I've left a big long response to your other comment, so I'll not bore you with another one here :-)
Could it be possible that she was buried beneath the other bodies? The Victorians only dug a few feet down, until they found bones. If Jane was buried on top of Catherine, no-one would find the late queen.
Thank you for another fascinating and thought-provoking video. I agree with your theory on the probable whereabouts of Katherine Howard's remains. Of course, bodies can disappear completely after burial - those of Cardinal Newman and one of the child victim's burials in Canada resulting from the Titanic sinking come to mind - but they were due to the acidity of the soil in the areas of the burials. I think what is more interesting is the identities of the unknown burials. Obviously, they must have been high-status to have been positioned there. Perhaps there are some misfiled papers somewhere in some Archives in the Tower of London, the Vatican or some ancient ambassador's notes that some historian will trip over one day that will reveal all, you never know....
Yes, the stories behind the others would be fascinating to learn. My gut feeling though is that some of them were just people who lived and worked in the Tower and were therefore allowed to be buried there. I don't think Hannah Beresford was famous for instance. She's just got her footnote in history now because she ended up on top of Anne Boleyn for a while. Anyone really high status would have a memorial plaque or tombstone (as some of the other burials in the Chapel do - you can't see all of them in my photos of the altar though).
I like that little tune at the beginning 🎶🎹🎶
In your video about the life of Kathering Howard, you postulated that Henry tried to eradicate all memory of Katherine. It is possible that he also had the body removed from the chapel, maybe even before she was buried, and disposed of elsewhere.
I agree with you on this one.
There seems to be no records about previous disturbances. However, it is quite obvious that the remains had been disturbed further vs expected.
So, I consider it possible that some remains may have been piled outside their original placement. Likely due to new burials. Katherine will be there just outside her original placement.
Its quite obvious the remains were manipulated. So, altough most of them were returned to the original places, its always possible that a couple of them were just returned in a slightly different place.
Would love to see a video on Scotland's "Bloody" George McKenzie!
I agree with you, that she was buried elsewhere in the Church.
Thank you..
You're welcome :-)
I didn't know that about lime! I always believed the theory of younger bones + lime = her completely decomposed?
I feel like she might not be there at all. Henry was really hurt and in shock with how it all played out. I wouldn’t be surprised if he had them dump her some where else.
Another intriguing video❤. I am inclined to agree with you. She is there. However, I can not be sure she didn't get mixed in with other skeletons either.
So, archaeologist here. I’ve been excavating at a site that was active from the early medieval period till 1855.
I’m confused as to how the Victorian’s think that they know who is who, their descriptions of the burials and skeletons will now days be discounted especially phrenology. Ageing skeletons definitively is very difficult and sometimes impossible depending on preservation and, it tends to go in age ranges, RIII was only determined to be 30-35. unless they have their name on their coffin you can never ever be sure who they are.
Grave diggers have absolutely no respect for other dead people especially from centuries before, they just dig and remove bones and place them back on top of the grave they’ve dug for. There’s every likelihood that she’s been cut through by a grave digger and bones dispersed. With the high turnover of individuals in this burial space it’s highly likely that this happened.
As for the idea that her bones would have completely disintegrated because she was young that actually wouldn’t be the case, her bones would be no different than those of Anne Boleyn - there’s not that many years different in skeleton terms. That would mostly happen with children’s bones or babies.
Thank you very much. I agree the phrenology stuff is utter nonsense, not to mention bigoted. That's very good to hear about the bones not breaking down as well as Katherine wasn't a small child. I agree that the descriptions of the skeletons on their own are not enough to positively identify anyone. The conclusions drawn were also based on people being in expected location, having been decapitated and sometimes on their height, but they are certainly not the kind of safe conclusions that were reached with Richard III. The best we can say is that we are sure as we can be with the evidence available to us that this person is Anne and this person is Lady Salisbury etc. I don't think we'll ever get any more evidence that we've got now though. I can't see the current monarch or future ones allowing the floor to be dug up and the bones checked.
Hello HC. very interesting video, thank you. In the last couple of years, I have corresponded with one person on Quora, and another on RUclips on this subject. The person on Quora and myself thought that Katherine's body was likely dissolved by lime. After listening to your video, that may not be the case. She probably is still there, just has not been found yet. The person on RUclips believes that no current monarch, or the church of England will allow those graves under the chapel to be disturbed, not without a compelling reason to do so, such as any possible future restoration work. So you are both probably right about that. The person on Quora believes, that the remains that were found, were not reburied in their original graves, but behind a wall, for security. The names on the floor are deliberately misleading. Thank you very much again, for a very informative, interesting video. Have a great day. 😊
Could you do a video about Elizabeth of York (Tudor), please
Oh yes, she's already on my list as I've been working my way through the women of the Wars of the Roses. She's next up in fact.
I tend to agree that simplest explanations are usually it. Probably just outside the area that was searched
I did not know there was a THIRD "peculiar" chapel! I thought only St George's at Windsor and Westminster Abbey were the only two. Are there others? _Fascinating!_
Umm would ever consider doing a video of Mary Boleyn? I find her so fascinating and can’t seem to find much about her. After all she is the ancestor of the Queen mother….!!! 😊
Wonderful video. You are certainly a skilled story teller. Based on everything you proposed, I believe that it's logical to assume that Katherine Howard lies in the chapel but has not been discovered. On another question, I believe the new King might be agreeable to do DNA testing on the remains of the "princes in the tower." I would like to know your thoughts on the potential identification of the children. Thank you.
There are so many new ways archeologists find things now. They could run ground penitrating radar over the floor and find the location of all the burials, without disturbing anything. At least when repairs need to be made, they would know if someone is under the spot. It is sad a true dig will not be done.
Yes, a lot more could be done now that wouldn't be invasive, though those kinds of tests also wouldn't give us the kind of answers that DNA and facial reconstructions could do of course.
excellent stuff lately - hopefully culminating in a hour long corpse of Cromwell vid please - 🛸✨
I've thought about that topic before actually. I'm just now sure how to do it justice given YT's dislike of showing dead people.
@@HistoryCalling - I think Alison Weir covered it very well with out morbid illustrations - I'm sure you would make the definitive detailed video - the tale of Charles revenge on Cromwell's corpse is one you would tell well HC - 🛸✨
There are some interesting photos of his head though that I'd love to be able to show, but I'm pretty sure that's a road to demonitisation :-(
@@HistoryCalling - post a short test video perhaps - I'm sure it's huge effort to produce your vids - if you can test that pic first then you'll know if it's worth putting the time into the full vid
Thomas or Oliver? Either would be a good shout. Or both ... 😃
I think she's in the chapel somewhere. I hope she remains undisturbed. What a horrible game they played with her. Let her rest now.
Poor documentation on her exact burial site kept Dr. Mouat from finding her remains back in 1876. Perhaps the people in charge of burying her did a poor job. Her body dissolved in lime. Whatever happened it’s sad just like her short life.
Thank you for your history lesson. Have a great weekend.
There may well have been better documentation created at the time, but which had disappeared over the centuries. I suppose their attitude was that these people should never be dug up anyway so what did it matter where they were buried? As for the lime theory, I'm confident enough in the research that I did for this video that the Victorians didn't understand its impact on a corpse and that it wouldn't have caused dissolving. I honestly think they just didn't happen across her and that whatever is left of her is still in there. Sadly we'll never know for sure though :-( Have a lovely weekend too and make sure to drop back in next week. I think you'll enjoy the topic of the upcoming video as well :-)
Another excellent video, thank you. I agree she's probably still there...maybe buried further from the altar deliberately? No evidence of course but it wouldn't be the first time revenge was sought after death.
Yes, I think she's in there somewhere too. It might not even have been a case of revenge. Maybe there just wasn't room for her in the corner of the room without undermining the stability of the walls?
@@HistoryCalling True, there could be any number of reasons; things happen & no-one wants to know at the time...the problem's literally been buried!
History calling do you think the princes in the tower case will ever be solved. Btw I love learning about Tudor history
Probably not entirely, but you should come back for next week's video. I won't say more than that. :-)
I was watching your video on charles ii and you mentioned Henry the 8th in it. I have to play devil's advocate, here, and say: Henry was under more pressure on producing A male heir whereas Charles had his brother.
Yes, I can absolutely take your point there. Charles did have his brother and had he wanted to, he could have pretended Monmouth was legitimate too, though both scenarios came with their own unique problems.
There were also two daughters of James (Mary and Anne) by his first marriage to Anne Hyde. Possibly due to Elizabeth's reign, there was less resistance to a female ruler than had previously been the case. In addition, William of Orange was next in the succession after Anne, and he was wed to Mary. (Mary II and William III ruled jointly) The succession then moved to the House of Hanover, through Sophie, daughter from a previous generation, and George I began what is now the House of Windsor.
Lovely episode. I think lye was used back in those times. Great place for ghosts?
Thank you so much. You mean lime? Apparently modern science has shown it doesn't break down bodies, but rather preserves them. Yes, I think there are some good ghost stories connected to the Tower and little wonder with all the nasty things that have happened there. 😱 👻
@@HistoryCalling Yes Lye, Lye has a sordid history of being used for murder and dissolving corpses.
Would they need royal permission to use something like ground penetrating radar on the floor to non-invasively inspect the remains (like I think they did with Shakespeare's grave once)? Of course they wouldn't be able to run DNA tests or anything like that, but they might have an idea of just how many bodies are buried under there and if anyone has been missed outside of the inspected area.
Yes, I think royal permission would be needed to do anything at all.
Wow, fascinating. I'm not sure about this, but is there technology that can scan for bones underground without actually physically digging?
Someone mentioned something called LIDAR here in the comments, but I don't know if that could be used in this case.
Lidar is from airplanes. They are flown over jungles to help search for lost cities and roads.