| clive bradbury |
03-27-15 12:19 PM |
Richard was Duke of Gloucester - not York.
Also - it wasn't a matter of exhuming him - it was essentially archeology. No one knew the body was his (or even there at all!) until the car park was excavated and forensic testing applied. It was not a matter of digging him up from a known location and reburying him at all.
The reburial has been funded by private donations - not taxpayers money.
The 'hype' is because it is history and archeology. One example - apologists for Richard have long been arguing that the hunchback was a Shakespearean/Tudor invention to discredit him. They were very upset when the skeleton was found to have scolosis. A good example of solid evidence to contradict written records/propaganda. I don't see that as 'hype', personally - just an example of good archeology at work. Admittedly, being a historian I would say that, wouldn't I?
|
