Richard III - Identifying the Remains
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- www.le.ac.uk/ri... - Richard III Educational Resources
Dr Turi King from the University of Leicester's Department of Genetics and Dr Jo Appleby from the University's School of Archaeology and Ancient History discuss the scientific processes and techniques which will be applied to the skeleton found under a council car park in September 2012, techniques which will subsequently confirm the remains as those of King Richard III.
This film was produced by External Relations, University of Leicester.
Filmed & Edited by Carl Vivian
The most astounding about his remains are, for me, his teeth. They link us directly to the past.
They’re the same teeth people saw hundreds of years ago. Every time he spoke, shouted, wept, screamed, laughed, those around him saw the exact same teeth we get to see today. It’s amazing.
I always think this too!
@@disgruntledunicorn007 It’s extraordinary right!
WOW! what a thought, something I had never considered but yeah I totally get it
quite no sugar at that time... so, healty teeth!
I think this way too! Same with the Moon and Sun, people 600 years ago saw the same celestial objects.
The last English king to die in battle. And found so bravely with such a deformity. He came so close to Henry Tudor.
Who replaced richard 3rd as king?
@@adolflenin4973 Henry Tudor?
@@adolflenin4973 henry the eighths dad
Richard fought to the death. A true warrior. I’m so glad that he’s finally been laid to rest with the respect and care he’s due. May he rest In peace.
Didn't he murder some children at one point?
@@stickerino a prince who was to be king of England. He spent the night at the Tower of London with his brother. Both little boys were murdered. Only recently found the boys bodies.
@@ccbarr58False. The bodies have never been found.
@@stickerinoNot proven, but likely.
Hope I’m correct in saying, tricky dickie was the last King of England to lead his army into battle. From thereafter the royals took a backseat, allowing others fight their battles for them.
This might be because Richard III was the last of the Plantagenets.👑
Now I think it would be interesting to do a computerised facial and body reconstruction from the bones.
They did, one of the most handsome men to ever roam this darkened Earth. God bless Richard III.
well, i think they have done that now.
ruclips.net/video/cjoylEI_Q-M/видео.html
Absolutely agree!!!
@@billybatts1261 haha yeah
Philippa Langley is the one who pinpointed where Richard was buried and deserves ALL the credit for finding him.
Not true. Everyone knew he was likely buried in the grounds of the old church, and where the church was. Just most of it was built over and whether he'd been moved or disturbed by other building works over the centuries was also unknown. Philipa persuaded everyone to have a go, and that it was worthwhile even if they didn't find him as other artifacts and historical information would be found. So she deserves credit for him being found, but not for knowing where to dig. She didn't pinpoint him.
This video was far better without the drama queen.
@@kevinskipp2762 bullshit. She was the driving force to have him exhumed! And found! Don’t make up lies!
Just saw the movie, seems like the head poncho at Leicester Uni was a bit of a cretin!
Bravo Philippa!
Can you imaging being the pathologist who gets to fiddle with the King's teeth and skull? I would be frightened to drop the thing. Nerves of steel.
And you can tell your grand kids...."I touched Richard III jaw bone"
Yes, these brave band of sisters who dared and did.
They can't bow or genuflect but most handle with the utmost of care. They seemed to do so.
I,d smash it to smithereens and stick him in the trash can where he and the rest of ALL so called royal freeloaders belong.
Can't wait to see "The Lost King". Props to the dedication it took to locate him.
The resemblance of Michael and Richard the III is uncanny. I noticed that in Michaels facial features as he was submitting the DNA sample. Great work.
zenoist2 He was indeed, Brave " _Richard led a cavalry charge deep into the enemy ranks in an attempt to end the battle quickly by striking at Henry Tudor himself.Accounts note that King Richard fought bravely and ably during this manoeuvre, unhorsing Sir John Cheyne, a well-known jousting champion, killing Henry's standard bearer Sir William Brandon and coming within a sword's length of Henry Tudor before being surrounded by Sir William Stanley's men and killed_ "
Within a sword's length - that's around 40 inches. He very nearly got him. Bet old henry tudor needed a change of underwear before his men brought Richard down.
Good one. I too favor Richard III over Tudor and always have. He got a bad wrap because of Shakespeare
Yusuf Reyes I don't favour either of them. I'm just recounting historical accounts of what happened.
I respect that
+Kha sab "Old" Henry Tudor was five years younger than Richard III; at Battle of Bosworth, age 26 to Richard's 32. You project your own juniority upon Richard.
@@JudgeJulieLit nonsense in English we use 'old' as a sort of term of endearment, old bean. old chap, old thing nothing to do with their age. Also I could claim that he's 'old' in the sense that this was all a long time ago. " _in days of old, when knights were bold_ " So you are doubly wrong, soss
p.s. my 'juniority' ?? I'm older than both of them mate
Pretty amazing how they found him.
Brilliant work, congratulations to all the people involved in this project.
Was there preexisting knowledge with regard to the general whereabouts of the body or was this truly an unintentional, lucky find by construction workers resurfacing or tearing up an old parking lot? Fascinating story.
They had a few possible locations for the burial, that was one of the rough areas. They knew that land was once an important graveyard, and being close to the battle thought it was a strong candidate for the location. So they looked for him knowing there was a slim chance and got lucky.
The area of this parking lot used to be a friary that dated back to the medieval period. Contemporary accounts of the Battle of Bosworth said that his body, after some public abuse, was taken to the friary and buried there. So researches had a pretty good idea that he was likely somewhere under the parking lot, but pinpointing the particular location was a bit of artistry and luck.
Not at all. An untrained woman was obsessed with finding him, followed all the historical references, and located him.
Those shallower wounds could have been solid hits that occurred while Richard was wearing a helmet. Those suits of armour were pretty sophisticated and could take one hell of a pounding.
Exceptional work in all the disciplines....Bravo...!!!
Fantastic documentary ! thanks for keeping the public up to date with this wonderful discovery.
Yes, they now have the male Plantagenet DNA, donated by the Beaufort family (who are directly descended in the male line from John of Gaunt). So if permission were given they could try and match this with the bones in the Abbey. But it won't happen. It would be opening a huge can of worms.
Philippa Jayne Langley is the name of the woman who started this entire project. She is the one who believed he was there, she is the one who fought tooth and nail to get the site excavated, she is the one behind it all. Yet she was never mentioned, and these people make it sound like their own glory.
Philippa Jayne Langley -- remember her name
The biggest surprise to me was that he actually had a skeletal deformity since it was long suspected that was an exaggeration by the Tudors to make him more villainous.
Thank you Philippa for your tenacity that gave U.K. a piece of historical truth. I hope one day to visit king's Richard tomb in Leicester.
The first archeologist is being totally disingenuous. It was the lady from the Richard III society who identified the burial location.
The archeologist didn't believe her, and dismissed her.
Watch the TV documentary. It is absolutely fascinating.
The archeologist was patronising and arrogant until she was proved wrong.
Totally wrong. Everyone knew he was buried in Greyfriars and where that was in modern day Leicester. The society lady raised the money and got people interested. There was never any secret that he was possibly in that area, just the odds of him being under the buildings or mashed by other works over the centuries meant it wasn't considered worthwhile looking
You need to watch it again as you have your facts very mixed up.
What is the nsme of the documentary
Yes
thanks for your reply. two skeletons were found. it's in wikipedia and here is part of it, "In 1674, some workmen remodelling the Tower of London dug up a wooden box containing two small human skeletons"
I'LL BET KING RICHARD IS HONORED BY YOUR TREATMENT AND SERVICE YOU HELD FOR HIM..
Not to mention the big letter R painted over the spot.
Oooommmm... Oh Richard is talking to me, the premonition is strong... he is directing me toward the grave...
+Sandra Boyer A big letter R painted over the spot in 1485, which lasted 530 years ... without attracting anyone's notice? Curiousest.
+Silicondos His kingdom for a nosegay to snuff out the modern petrol odor !
Sandra Boyer the letter “R” in the car park stood to marked a reserved spot. That was a coincidence but I don’t believe in coincidences.
So we can confirm then that he really did have a hunched back and a slender figure. Interesting.
6:07. She kind of talks around it, but the injury to the pelvis was from a dagger up the caboose.
That's the way it is living in those times by the sword. The fittest remain alive and those lessor die by the sword!!
Absolutely fascinating.
I just find it amazing that these people are actually touching and pulling out teeth of an ancient king
He is not considered ancient. 2 or 3 thousand tears old would be ancient.
To paraphrase Shakespeare's Hamlet, "Alas, poor York!"
FASCINATING!!🌹🌹
Simply extraordinary
Yes he was brave and was willing to die to stay in power, and he was willing to kill and he did both. No doubt in my mind he killed those poor little nephews of his, no doubt. He may have had someone else do it but we will never know. He had the opportunity and a huge motive.
Quo Bono? only him!
Absolutely DETEST this university with all my heart for everything they allowed to happen in their crime-ridden halls of residence. Shame on all of you.
Those teeth are 560 years old and still look better than alot of people i see today.
I'm not disagreeing with anybody or anything, all i was saying is that it's really nice something interesting has happened here, that's all.
so....there appears to be a new fracture of the skull above the left eye at or between the frontal and parietal. especially as they don't mention it as an injury to the skull at or before death. my first thought was that someone (digging) messed up a bit.....just a guess. hope I'm wrong. if so wouldn't you hate to be the person that put a trowel thru Richard III's skull? but accidents do happen.
That's interesting. I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
So exciting!
.....and this is one reason perhaps permission will not be given to analyse the bones. Not that it really matters today, but if Edward IV's illegitimacy were confirmed, then all his children would not be of Royal blood. This includes Elizabeth of York, who married Henry VII. Thus, all subsequent monarchs to the present day would be treading on thin ice (the present Queen descends from Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII, who married James IV of Scotland, from them all houses are descended).
A moot point, as Henry VII through his mother Margaret Beaufort descends from Lancastrian John of Gaunt, elder brother and so of superior royal title to Lionel and his Yorkist heirs --and as Gaunt's issue Henry VI (grandson of Richard II usurper Henry 4) left only one child, Prince Edward who died without issue.
Whose idea was it to start the dig in the first case?
This is so amazing.
What is really persuasive are the cuts on the bones.
How they found Michael?
He had very healthy teeth!
Amazing
Of all the persons from antiquity to dna sequence, a king of England would be a dream candidate due to how much, relatively, we know about them and their lineage.
geez..poor guy sure did Suffer..RIP..
Hoping he's residing in the whitest clouds in heaven where a man of his prestige and stature belongs. He is at peace.
Investigative TV Journalist discovers - > > > ruclips.net/video/Jtr5WkUsYDk/видео.html CHAIN - of - Title Forgery FACTORY to steal American Homes - Discovered in San Diego and Polly # 1 just told the F.B.I. via a Private Investigator. Oh MY. Don't miss this.! ! ! !
Which wikipedia article contains this information? I'll go and read it. Thanks.
We now have the male DNA of the Plantagenet family so it's possible they can test the supposed bones of Edward V and Richard of York now in Westminster Abbey. As far as Richard III is concerned an Act of Parliament authorised him to become king, the two nephews being declared illegitimate. He was the crowned and annointed King of England. Despite what he subsequently may have done, he was Sovereign and Head of State of England 1483-85 and he should have an appropriate burial.
I was thinking that, it would be really interesting to see what the whole body would have looked like. The facial reconstruction was amazing enough though and it banished a few myths, not all reconstructions are as flattering and they show that history paints a rosy picture, just look at the recent reconstruction of Robert Burns. He wasn't a bonny lad like Richard!
Long live the king
Richard the III rd in Shakespeare's drama is a fascinating character. I love this villain.
an interprative view by Shakespheare, certainly.
That love would NOT have been reciprocated.
Wonderful!
It would be interesting if they'd be able to do some tests and maybe solve the mystery that has kept people guessing for ovee 500 years.
Why wasn’t he found in a casket versus just lying in dirt? Had the casket disintegrated?
Caskets didn't exist in his time.
Não sejas idiota
Watch the documentary about finding Richard III. This 'expert' archeologist, who is so cocky now, was totally different.
every child should know its mother But not its dad???? Richard is showcased as the typical villain, being responsible for a number of murders. Shakespeare depicts him as stabbing Prince Edward along with his brothers, before going to the Tower and dispatching Henry VI. Then during Act I of Richard III, he seemingly plots to become King and engineers the downfall of his brother George, Duke of Clarence by having him sent to the tower and eventually murdered.
Again, this is a major fabrication and in fact Richard proved extremely loyal to his brother, performing as a successful military commander during the Wars of the Roses. His loyalty was rewarded with control of the North and on Edward’s death, he was considered the principal statesman of the realm. Richard took no part in either the death of King Henry VI or Edward, with the former’s death most likely on the orders of Edward IV, while his son died at the Battle of Tewkesbury. Although Richard and George had a hostile relationship due to issues of inheritance, it was Edward IV who tired of George’s antics and ordered his execution for treason in 1478.
The story of the Princes in the Tower is arguably Richard’s most serious crime and sets him out to be England’s most infamous monarch. Even now, no one knows for sure what happened to Richard’s two young nephews; Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury. Shakespeare, however, makes it perfectly clear that Richard ordered their deaths to enable him to usurp the throne. It’s true that Richard benefited the most from their deaths, but having already proclaimed them illegitimate after declaring Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville void, did he still perceive them as a threat? Indeed, there were a number of different people who could have been responsible. Historians today still have no definitive evidence to prove what actually happened.
See my reply above to the other person who informed me of this.
You can't simply drag someone in to a studio, take a few photo's then make a diagnosis. The medical profession studies signs and symptoms: signs=what the patient says, symptoms=what u see..
You might see two different patients: an upright one at 9 am one slumped over at 5pm..
Absolutely
So interesting
"Sk-lee-tle" remains? 🤔
😂
British and American English are two different, but closely-related, languages. Her Majesty's subjects also accent "aluminum" differently.
Aye, lived here all my life and i've never once said Leicester did anything to make me proud of it, and now i can sleep a little better knowing that we had been noticed for something such as this.
I think it's so windy that they put up a parking sign that says you can't park between lines and you can buried British monarchs there
Isn't it amazing that folks are so passionate about their hatred of someone from so long ago and there is really only hearsay and speculation plus some so-called first-hand accounts? I'm not defending the man, I'm sure he was quite despicable. But all in all isn't that how one holds on to power? Machiavelli, you all know!
Not how Jesus held onto power, two millenia after his ascent into Heaven.
yes........he who has the most marbles, wins the game.......lol
I find it a little hard to believe that a man who came up with a system of bail for the incarcerated was "despicable." More likely, his reputation was besmirched by the very man who took Richard's life.
It's not hearsay, only he benefitted by declaring his brother's children were bastards so enabling himself next in line!
Awesome
Oops! You're right, I'm wrong. Chaucer worked for Ed. III, & Richard II.
So cool
I just get the feeling 2 or 3 foes attacked him . Wonder how many flesh or mortal abdominal injuries he also received ?
كيف عرفوا ان هذا هو جينات الملك؟ لو مات قبل ١٠٠ سنة ممكن لكن مات قبل ٥٠٠ سنة ثم يكتشف رفاته ثم يثبت انه هذا هو الملك لا اعتقد انه صحيح ابدا الارض مليئه بالاموات ثانيا العظام لا يمكن ان تبقى تحت الارض بحالتها الجيده طوال ٥٠٠ سنة
actually many bones have turned up at the Tower. A child of about 12 was found not long ago. A few hundred years ago it may be have been thought to be one of the princes. It is in fact Iron Age! As the bones of the 2 kids were under TEN FOOT of rubble I am suggesting they were from long before.
Might be me being thick but why no name on a plaque of some sort in the coffin so who ever digs up the coffin they know who it was ?
He was buried by his enemies. "Out of sight and out of mind" was the whole point.
@@roberthudson1959 oh right that makes sense how thick of me , thanks for the explanation 👍
The letter ,"R" on the exact spot tells me someone knew where he was buried.
"A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse".
PHILIPPA LANGLEY should be credited
"King Richard, late mercifully reigning over us, was through great treason.....piteously slain and murdered, to the great heaviness of this city."
Recorded in the Minutes of the City of York by the Mayor's Serjeant of the Mace the day AFTER Richard’s death at the Battle of Bosworth on 22 August 1485.
Hardly the epitaph of a hated usurper.
what do you call a male ladybug
if poison is expired, does that make it less poisonous or more poisonous
if i say that everything i tell you is a lie, am i lying to you or telling you the truth?
was i the only one feeling slightly indignant for poor Richard as his molar was being extracted from his jaw? i wondered what his last meal was? Probably some pheasant included.
Cool
So the two most significant injuries, one to the back of the head, and the other to the pelvis were both from the BACK. Also, based on the marks, different weapons were used. So a bunch of men ganged up against him and stabbed him from the back. Not exactly brave or noble.
Actually, I'm an american so there's a lot I don't understand (no jokes please). The two boys (skeletons) found in the tower, shouldn't they be dna tested to see if they were the rightful heir and his brother. and couldn't they determine cause of death. and if it is them doesn't it prove richard was the poster boy for "evil usurper" that they've always said? and if he is, why would you want to give him anything except a pine box and a shovel full in the face? just wondering.
That would require Royal Assent.
King Charles III is a descendent of Richard III elder brother King Edward IV through is daughter Elisabeth of York wife of King Henry VII
Chaucer live 100 years earlier. in the reign of Edward III and Richard II--not Richard III.
gloria commenting; eleven battle wounds - nine from the front.
His teeth are better than mine
You're welcome to your opinion but someone who is cowardly is more bound to kill himself rather then let the enemy finish him off, and from what I'm hearing here they really finished him off! I think for some knights of the era - he did start out as a knight - there was a disgrace in losing so it was better to die on the battlefield then to retreat into exile. Then again this speculation which seems to be the main thing about RichardIII, most of his history is speculation.
Shame on you for not mentioning of the overarching contribution of Philippa Langley! See the film 'The Lost King'. You be the judge.
So Sherlock Holmes is here to pay tributes.This is indeed a very historical part of British than the wedding of current royal families.
Im surprised that the dna is still intact
I beleive she explained that the dna was found in the teeth.
my guess is that Richard had marfans. Those people are very thin.
My Grandfather. No, I don't use all of the Gs. There are too many and don't matter.
No, he is NOT. Richard III left no descendants.
Bro died fighting, Now he is laying on scientist’s table 💀
How cool and gratifying it must be to find out you are so directly descended from a historical figure like that, even if it's quite possible they weren't the greatest. We are so much more than individuals alone, we are links in a never-ending chain who carry fascinating stories in our cells, waiting to be discovered and told.
rlt94 👍 comment
RIchard 3rd left no known descendants.
@@annpardue4669 his descendants are nieces and nephews from his sister.
@@annpardue4669 He didn't leave a paternal line. But there are descendants.
@@squirleyspitmonkey3926 technically they would be descendants of Richard IIIs sister not Richard himself.
He had really nice teeth
Can't deny that haha
That's what I thought, he was from ages ago, I assumed they all had bad teeth, his corpse's teeth are better then a lot of people's. 😂
the boar showed his tusks!
It was in the Tudor period that people living in England had access to raw sugar for the first time *correction - slave labour in the Tudor period actually made sugar much more affordable*.You see a massive increase in chronic tooth decay and deaths attributed to rotting teeth in the Tudor Middle class and Nobility (as they now had a massive proportion of sugar in their diets) they actually used to eat more sugar treats in the hopes to stop their bad breath caused by tooth decay from eating so much sugar. I thought it was only a recent issue for humans.
That was what I was thinking
I find it interesting that despite his apparent back problems he happened to have been a military leader who led troops in battle, which is probably why he was more or less hacked to pieces. On one show despite losing the battle he refused to retreat which say something about the man himself.
Credible accounts have him charging forward in the midst of the battle with his contingent in a decapitation-type strike to take out the enemy commander and thus end the battle early. He became isolated, was dismounted from his horse, and then, stuck in mud, surrounded and overkilled.
He had bent back
Henry the 7th Earl of Richmond final blow he gave Richard the3rd
Uh huh ….. and so why then was he buried in that particular graveyard??🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
@@Peirithous Good question, but it was his enemies who buried him there. They weren't going to be interested in giving him him a distinguished burial especially since Henry Tudor was overthrowing him. It was even supposed they threw him in a river if I heard correctly.
He wouldnt have even gone into a battle if he was a coward.
Can you imagine any king or president, prime minister or whatever doing that today in a war thay have declared and begun?
Nor can I.
He was the last english king killed in battle.
No doubt he was a brave man ready to die for his beleifs and fully worthy of my respect.
I agree. Why did they defile his grave?
Dale Val my guy this comment was 7 years ago
@@daleval2182 At first, they didn't know it was his grave. The only US president to command as president was Madison, against the English.
@@daleval2182 Don’t get emotional about it.
@@jm329 stfu
There's always something eerie about seeing the teeth of historical figures, those are the only parts of their skeleton that would have been visible in life.
I agree, there were several parties intent on removing the House of York. of course what happened during the Tudor dynasty was that virtually all the remaining descendants of the Plantagenet dynasty were executed. This facilitated the Stuart claim to the throne when the Tudors died out in 1603. And we all know what a total disaster that was. Short-sightedness always leads to problems down the line.
May you now rest in peace. Personally I would like to have seen your eternal burial site at Yorkminster but the amazing work done by those in Leicester. I wonder if the actors playing Richard 111 will change their look?
Every time i hear her describe a wound i just start to think how the battle would have been and the scars he would've had if he'd lived through it
I honour his brave and valiant fight to the death.
He was a monster and a child killer!
@@alanthomas2064 Read a modern history book ffs, the two princes were seen as illegitimate in the eyes of the government so it would’ve made no sense for Richard to then murder them unless it was to put them on spikes and show he destroyed the illegitimate line. It was most likely the mother of Henry Tudor, who defeated and then succeeded Richard III which ordered the death of the princes. Mainly because the Tudor claim to the throne was strenuous at best and the Tudors historically wiped out any claimants who had better claims than themselves.
@@GuacJuan Richard WAS the government. He betrayed his brother by declaring his brother’s marriage illegal and his children illegitimate. But in those days people could be declared illegitimate one day and be re-legitimised the next. (See John of Gaunt and his complicated descendants). So the boys could still be a threat to Richard’s rule. He killed those he thought would support the boys, dismissed the boys servants and they were never seen again. But Richard under-estimated his sister-in-law, Elizabeth Woodville, and Margaret Beaufort, great grand-daughter of John of Gaunt and mother to Henry Tudor.
He like all royals past and present was a greedy freeloading thug scumbag.