This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/world/europe/richard-the-third-bones.html

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Scholars Set to Say Whether Bones Belong to Richard III Scholars Set to Say Whether Bones Belong to Richard III
(35 minutes later)
LONDON — Scholars plan to announce Monday whether remains found under a parking lot in the English Midlands town of Leicester are those of King Richard III, for centuries the most widely reviled of English monarchs, paving the way for a possible reassessment of his brief but violent reign. LEICESTER, England — Scholars plan to announce Monday whether remains found under a parking lot in this English Midlands city are those of King Richard III, for centuries the most widely reviled of English monarchs, paving the way for a possible reassessment of his brief but violent reign.
In what could be one of the most significant discoveries in modern British archaeology, the researchers from the University of Leicester plan to make public the results of weeks of tests that, a spokesman for the university, Richard Taylor, said could unlock “a 500-year-old mystery.”In what could be one of the most significant discoveries in modern British archaeology, the researchers from the University of Leicester plan to make public the results of weeks of tests that, a spokesman for the university, Richard Taylor, said could unlock “a 500-year-old mystery.”
The skeleton, with an arrowhead in its back and bearing other signs of battle wounds, was exhumed last September in the ruins of an ancient priory — now located under a parking lot. It was found in the same place as historians say Richard III was buried after perishing at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.The skeleton, with an arrowhead in its back and bearing other signs of battle wounds, was exhumed last September in the ruins of an ancient priory — now located under a parking lot. It was found in the same place as historians say Richard III was buried after perishing at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.
Since then it has undergone DNA and other testing to try to confirm its identity. The skeleton was said to have a curved spine, which would be consistent with contemporary accounts of Richard III’s appearance. DNA samples from the remains have been compared with the DNA of a descendant of the monarch’s family, Michael Ibsen.Since then it has undergone DNA and other testing to try to confirm its identity. The skeleton was said to have a curved spine, which would be consistent with contemporary accounts of Richard III’s appearance. DNA samples from the remains have been compared with the DNA of a descendant of the monarch’s family, Michael Ibsen.
Mr. Ibsen’s mother was a 16th-generation niece of King Richard’s.Mr. Ibsen’s mother was a 16th-generation niece of King Richard’s.
Since at least the late 18th century, scholars have debated whether Richard was the victim of a campaign of denigration by the Tudor monarchs who succeeded him. His supporters argue that he was a decent king, harsh in the ways of his time, but a proponent of groundbreaking measures to help the poor, extend protections to suspected felons and ease bans on the printing and selling of books. Since at least the late 18th century, scholars have debated whether Richard was the victim of a campaign of denigration by the Tudor monarchs who succeeded him. His supporters argue that he was a decent king, harsh in the ways of his time, but a proponent of groundbreaking measures to help the poor, extend protections to suspected felons and ease bans on the printing and selling books.
But his detractors cast Richard’s 26 months on the throne as one of England’s grimmest periods, its excesses captured in his alleged role in the murder in the Tower of London of two young princes — his own nephews — to rid himself of potential rivals.But his detractors cast Richard’s 26 months on the throne as one of England’s grimmest periods, its excesses captured in his alleged role in the murder in the Tower of London of two young princes — his own nephews — to rid himself of potential rivals.
Shakespeare told the king’s story in “Richard III,” depicting him as an evil, scheming hunchback whose death at 32 ended the War of the Roses and more than three centuries of Plantagenet rule, bookended England’s Middle Ages, and proved a prelude to the triumphs of the Tudors and Elizabethans.Shakespeare told the king’s story in “Richard III,” depicting him as an evil, scheming hunchback whose death at 32 ended the War of the Roses and more than three centuries of Plantagenet rule, bookended England’s Middle Ages, and proved a prelude to the triumphs of the Tudors and Elizabethans.
In Shakespeare’s account, Richard was killed after being unhorsed on the battlefield, crying: “A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse.”In Shakespeare’s account, Richard was killed after being unhorsed on the battlefield, crying: “A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse.”
If the remains are identified as his on Monday, it may lead to demands for him to buried alongside other monarchs in a place of honor, such as London’s Westminster Abbey.If the remains are identified as his on Monday, it may lead to demands for him to buried alongside other monarchs in a place of honor, such as London’s Westminster Abbey.
The bones were first located when archaeologists used ground-penetrating radar on the site of the former priory and discovered that it was not underneath a 19th-century bank where it was presumed to be, but under a parking lot across the street. The remains were located within days of the start of digging. The bones were first located when archaeologists used ground-penetrating radar on the site of the former priory and discovered that it was not underneath a 19th century bank where it was presumed to be, but under a parking lot across the street. The remains were located within days of the start of digging.

John F. Burns reported from Leicester, and Alan Cowell from London.