My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

This forum is the home of Mumsnet classic threads.

Mumsnet classics

Archaeologists are DNA testing some bones they've found to see if they might be the remains of Richard III. Are there any other members of the Royal Family....

746 replies

seeker · 12/09/2012 13:19

where DNA testing might produce interesting results?

OP posts:
Report
LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 12/09/2012 22:05

They could have been anywhere. Out of sight, out of mind.

Report
LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Themumsnot · 12/09/2012 22:09

Not buying it. They had disappeared. People were saying that they were dead. For two whole years. The simplest explanation is usually the true one.

Report
Themumsnot · 12/09/2012 22:09

I'll buy your second explanation LeQ, but not the first one Grin

Report
LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 12/09/2012 22:11

Right you... OUTSIDE!

Report
Themumsnot · 12/09/2012 22:13

You can't fight me, I'm a girl.

Report
LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TunipTheVegemal · 12/09/2012 22:15
Report
EdithWeston · 12/09/2012 22:17

The DNA results are going to take ages - presumably as it is hard, though no longer impossible, to process remains so old to produce a useable sample. Once they have got that, it should be fairly straightforward but does indeed rest on an assumption that there is an unbroken matriarchal line in the family (I'm pretty sure it's the female line that they have to look for down the Xs). Any adopted children could invalidate the whole testing hypothesis.

Report
nipersvest · 12/09/2012 22:17

i went to bosworth last week with dd's class on a school trip. was a very interesting day out, the guides were good at explaining it all and got the kids to act out the battle.

Report
MattSmithIsMine · 12/09/2012 22:18

Are we strictly talking about dead people?

Report
LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaQueen · 12/09/2012 22:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

kim147 · 12/09/2012 22:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ALittleScatterOfRain · 12/09/2012 22:26

Just backing up a little (well, jumping forward in history) to the Queen Regnant bit, am I right in thinking that Anne Boleyn was actually crowned as a Queen Regnant rather than a Queen Consort?

Report
SorrelForbes · 12/09/2012 22:27

LaQueen - I read We Speak No Treason at the age of 14 and developed a huge crush on Richard which continues to this day Grin. I really must buy a new copy...

Report
SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 12/09/2012 22:38

Im fairly sure it has been suggested that the bones thought to be the princes be DNA tested, so there must be a match.
Can men and women pass on matenal DNA, or is it just mother to daughter?
There is a constant familial link through to present day. If its either sex, then surely the DNA could be tested?

Report
LineRunner · 12/09/2012 22:40

This is about Harry, right?

Report
SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 12/09/2012 22:49

??? @ Linerunner? Hmm

Report
SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 12/09/2012 22:50

Isnt dentine a good source of DNA in very old bones?

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

LineRunner · 12/09/2012 22:50
Report
seeker · 12/09/2012 22:51

Whatever gave you that idea, liner runner?

OP posts:
Report
Vagaceratops · 12/09/2012 22:51

You should all go to Bosworth - its brilliant :o

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.