Leicester's winter made glorious by Richard III

The announcement that King Richard III's remains have been identified will not end debate over their scientific, historical and cultural significance, says an archaeologist

So the remains found beneath a car park in Leicester, UK, are indeed those of Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England. At a well-orchestrated press conference today, the University of Leicester team examining the bones presented overwhelming, if circumstantial, evidence that the remains are his. They had battle scars consistent with the historical account of his death and the subsequent stripping of his body; the radiocarbon dates fell into the correct range; the slightly built individual with a spinal deformity that the remains point to fits historical descriptions; and the DNA evidence is consistent with genealogically traced descendants.

It would be churlish to pick holes in the conclusions. What's interesting, however, is that the results have not been through any kind of peer-review process. The funding includes a tranche from the British commercial TV station Channel 4, which is airing a special programme tonight about the project and its findings.

(Update: This article originally said that the funding "seems to have been largely privately sourced". However, the University of Leicester has since tweeted that it contributed "85%+" of the total funding, including that of all of the scientific analysis.)

It is possible the archaeologists were forced down this route, with intense media pressure to get results and make them public as soon as possible (the DNA results were apparently finalised only yesterday night). Our sclerotic research councils are simply too slow to respond to this kind of research, while the journals work to their own timescale as well.

No smoking gun

Before we get carried away, there was no "smoking gun" in the announcement, no single piece of evidence that made it absolutely certain that this was Richard III. The DNA results were impressive, but they were from mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) alone. They showed that the two known maternal-line descendants of Richard III shared sequences of mtDNA in common with the excavated remains.

What was missing from the announcement was any indication of how common such mtDNA sequences might be in western European populations. The failure to take such considerations into account can lead to basic errors such as what happened several years ago, when it was claimed that Mesolithic Cheddar Man had a descendant in the person of a history teacher living near where the remains were found. The public (and the media) are easily persuaded by DNA evidence, so these are the remains of Richard III.

Soon the bones will go into a special tomb in Leicester cathedral, and the story of Richard III will have been rewritten. But there will still be controversy. Was Richard blackened by Tudor propaganda as an evil, deformed king (in the days when the royal personage had to be physically perfect), or did he, as the archaeological evidence apparently shows, suffer from a mild spinal sclerosis? Should the Royal Shakespeare Company now portray the king not as a hunchback with a withered arm, but as a slightly lopsided figure?

Perhaps the best bit of the whole business is that Richard III was found in Leicester, one of the UK's most multicultural cities. Here is British history that can be embraced by the people of Leicester, whatever their ethnic background. The remains will stay in the city, providing local excitement and a heritage buzz for years to come. Our history lessons will return to focusing on the kings and queens of England. Maybe the real winner will be Michael Gove, the education secretary, who champions the teaching of British history.

Mark Horton is professor in archaeology at the University of Bristol and contributor to factual TV shows including BBC2?s Coast. In 2010 he was part the team that identified the remains of Queen Eadgyth, the grand-daughter of Alfred the Great

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Source: http://feeds.newscientist.com/c/749/f/10897/s/28393199/l/0L0Snewscientist0N0Carticle0Cdn231320Eleicesters0Ewinter0Emade0Eglorious0Eby0Erichard0Eiii0Bhtml0Dcmpid0FRSS0QNSNS0Q20A120EGLOBAL0Qonline0Enews/story01.htm

toy story 4 toy story 4 steam kristin chenoweth Robert Blake BLK Water ESPYs