For want of a comma...Leicester Uni owns him?

There's a new interview with Philippa Langley in Canada's MacLean's. She states that the entire legal issue began because a comma was inserted in error by the Ministry of Justice on the exhumation license application. So the application read "Leicester University, Archaeology Service" rather than "Leicester University Archaeology Service," which made it look like LU was applying.

She says a lot more, too.

INTERVIEW HERE

Wednesday wrote:

There's a new interview with Philippa Langley in Canada's MacLean's. She states that the entire legal issue began because a comma was inserted in error by the Ministry of Justice on the exhumation license application. So the application read "Leicester University, Archaeology Service" rather than "Leicester University Archaeology Service," which made it look like LU was applying.

She says a lot more, too.

INTERVIEW HERE

 

Thanks for posting this, Wednesday!

Now that I've seen Phillipa's explanation, I can work on un-mixing my feelings about scientific researchers, historians, and confliciting versions of events.

I still feel that a more accurate version of Richard's life and reign depends on accurate, unbiased scientific research.  I hope that continuing research will clearly disprove Tudor distortions and all of their spin-offs.  I'm also hoping that Whitehound will receive an answer to her letter about the Minories burials and Boudicca's Destruction Horizon that will contribute to that disproof.

But Leicester University's failure to honor Phillipa's contract weakened my faith in scientific research.  Hopefully, the conflicts will be resolved so that Richard receives a respectful burial that Ricardians can feel good about.

I hope the archival research Phillipa says she can't talk about yet will reinforce progress towards sending the Tudor distortions where they belong.  The day when most folks routinely acknowledge the difference between Tudor fictions and historical facts can't come too soon.

phaecilia

I get the feeling that there will be ongoing scientific research on Richard's remains. That is, after all, what Leicester University wants -- perpetual access to his bones for exactly that purpose. But to me that means they're not really burying him or laying him to rest; they're merely putting him in storage for future use.

As for accurate, unbiased scientific research, I suppose it depends on who LU lets access the genetic material and the papers they write? I recall reading that LU had given up one of his teeth to someone outside of Leicester. This was months ago, I wish I'd made a note of who was awarded such a treasure. I wonder if the public will be able to read each paper as its released, or if some analyses will be reserved for academia.

The cynical part of me thinks most scientists don't care who he was. They see him only as a medieval object for study and a stepping-stone to increase their reputation and achieve tenure. It seems this attitude changed to something more tender in those involved with the discovery of Richard's remains. I hope that's so, that it's not just a public relations mask that was donned when those involved figured out what he means to some people.

Leicester can't honor Philippa's desire that he be taken to a sanctified place of rest. They can't let him out of their sight, their custodianship. As they've prevented Philippa taking charge of him, I'm sure they fear anyone else taking charge of him and not giving him back. As for laying him out...that won't happen. Science needs his bones secured in a sterile ossuary.

I'm glad Philippa is in a position to dig in records long ignored. They can't stop her from finding any buried treasure. And if she does, no one is going to wrest that part of him from her.

What I've been wondering lately is if there's proof Henry VII and Margaret and Morton, et. al. lied propagandized throughout his reign. Or was Richard and his contemporary reputation the only thing they needed to manipulate and blacken at the time. One problem I think is that the common argument is "it was commonly known" that Richard had this or Richard did this. What may be harder to prove is that the Tudors themselves were the ones who began the spin in the first place.

We know now that Shakespeare's source(s) were wrong about Richard's arm and his back. So if one takes the stance that if a witness lies about one thing, it makes his/her entire testimony suspect and subject to being thrown out, then Shakespeare's sources are all suspect. But how to prove the source behind those sources? Was More informed by Morton, and did Morton spin his details himself? Or does the path lead back to Margaret Beaufort or Henry, and how would one go about ascertaining it? It's not as if we're going to find the medieval equivalent of damning emails from HT to JM instructing him to shape Richard into the archetypal wicked, murdering uncle.

What we need is hard evidence that those little brats from the Tower were protected and never murdered by Richard. If we had that, then it wouldn't matter who started the wicked uncle rumors because the truth would overwhelm the rumors and history could then be rewritten.

It's all so frustrating and hopeful at the same time. I wish there were an army of Philippas and Whitehounds out there who had the time and the budget to access long-ignored archives. Finding Richard was a huge miracle; we need a succession of smaller ones now to lay in a line behind his remains.