Fw: On the genome sequencing of Richard III

Earlier this year, the University of Leicester announced that it plans to sequence the genome of Richard III's DNA. In time, this will mean that we can all know a lot more about the man  e.g. his eye and hair colour, the nature of his scoliosis  and something about his family.

Inevitably, members of the Society are divided on the issue of further testing on the remains of King Richard. Messages have been received expressing both concern and approval. Whether one approves or disagrees, it must be remembered that, once the excavation began and the subsequent events were started, the Society no longer had any control. The Richard III Society is not the custodian of the remains and Society funds paid only for the dig and the facial reconstruction. The scientific testing has been paid for by others, including Leicester University.

The chairman has now spoken with the team from the University and been assured that the amount of material required for the genome testing was very small'.

An analogy can be made with the bones in an urn in Westminster Abbey, the alleged Princes, and the fact that further testing has not been available. Many people have been asking for them to be the subject of modern analysis on the basis that it is owed to future generations to discover as much as possible. It hasn't been allowed for the Abbey bones, but it can be done for King Richard.

Understandable concern has been expressed about the ethics of the project because it involves the remains of an anointed king, but whether king or a peasant, it makes no difference provided the remains are treated in a serious and respectful way.

Michael Ibsen, the named living collateral descendant who gave one of the samples of DNA used to confirm the remains as being those of Richard III, has not objected to this further testing on his late sixteen times great uncle. Indeed, he is participating in the project.

For those who are against the further testing, there are at least two on-line petitions which can be accessed for you to express your choice.

There are many arguments for and against further testing but it should be remembered that, according to its aims, the Richard III Society is to promote in every possible way research into the life and times of Richard III. It is our responsibility to uphold this aim and to secure a reassessment of his life and reputation.

Executive Committee.

And there was me thinking it was a sensible, respectful and balanced response (whilst not necessarily reflecting everything that the Society's saying behind the scenes).

Thanks, also, to Tamara for forwarding a thought-provoking and pertinent email.

Jonathan

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Earlier this year, the University of Leicester announced that it plans to sequence the genome of Richard III's DNA. In time, this will mean that we can all know a lot more about the man  e.g. his eye and hair colour, the nature of his scoliosis  and something about his family.
 
Inevitably, members of the Society are divided on the issue of further testing on the remains of King Richard. Messages have been received expressing both concern and approval. Whether one approves or disagrees, it must be remembered that, once the excavation began and the subsequent events were started, the Society no longer had any control. The Richard III Society is not the custodian of the remains and Society funds paid only for the dig and the facial reconstruction. The scientific testing has been paid for by others, including Leicester University.
 
The chairman has now spoken with the team from the University and been assured that the amount of material required for the genome testing was very small'.
 
An analogy can be made with the bones in an urn in Westminster Abbey, the alleged Princes, and the fact that further testing has not been available. Many people have been asking for them to be the subject of modern analysis on the basis that it is owed to future generations to discover as much as possible. It hasn't been allowed for the Abbey bones, but it can be done for King Richard.
 
Understandable concern has been expressed about the ethics of the project because it involves the remains of an anointed king, but whether king or a peasant, it makes no difference provided the remains are treated in a serious and respectful way.
 
Michael Ibsen, the named living collateral descendant who gave one of the samples of DNA used to confirm the remains as being those of Richard III, has not objected to this further testing on his late sixteen times great uncle. Indeed, he is participating in the project.
 
For those who are against the further testing, there are at least two on-line petitions which can be accessed for you to express your choice.
 
There are many arguments for and against further testing but it should be remembered that, according to its aims, the Richard III Society is to promote in every possible way research into the life and times of Richard III. It is our responsibility to uphold this aim and to secure a reassessment of his life and reputation.

Executive Committee.

Yes, Sandra, please don't leave us, we love your contributions. This will all be settled soon and we can all get back to defending Richard's reputation.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Sandra Never give up - we've all been there! Don't go - it doesn't help him. BTW did anyone see the article (on Yahoo yesterday which I can't now find) about the Queen's surprise to learn that Richard was found under a carpark? She was presenting awards to universities yesterday with Prince Philip when she gave one to Leics about the dig and DNA and expressed surprise. Now the Queen (and Philip) are not the sort to feign surprise to be diplomatic - they'd rather dodge round the whole subject or gloss over it. Methinks some courtier may be getting a well-aimed boot!! H

On Thursday, 27 February 2014, 18:00, "cherryripe.eileenb@..." <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
This subject is proving to be very devisive....which is a great shame...
And Sandra...it will be a great shame if you leave the Society but having said that I can fully understand how you feel......Eileen

Yes, Sandra, please don't leave us, we love your contributions. This will all be settled soon and we can all get back to defending Richard's reputation.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Sandra Never give up - we've all been there! Don't go - it doesn't help him. BTW did anyone see the article (on Yahoo yesterday which I can't now find) about the Queen's surprise to learn that Richard was found under a carpark? She was presenting awards to universities yesterday with Prince Philip when she gave one to Leics about the dig and DNA and expressed surprise. Now the Queen (and Philip) are not the sort to feign surprise to be diplomatic - they'd rather dodge round the whole subject or gloss over it. Methinks some courtier may be getting a well-aimed boot!! H

On Thursday, 27 February 2014, 18:00, "cherryripe.eileenb@..." <cherryripe.eileenb@...> wrote:
This subject is proving to be very devisive....which is a great shame... And Sandra...it will be a great shame if you leave the Society but having said that I can fully understand how you feel......Eileen

Yes, Sandra, please don't leave us, we love your contributions. This will all be settled soon and we can all get back to defending Richard's reputation.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Many of my friends and I have contacted Dr Stone respectfully to give their views only to get rather patronizing answers. I do agree however the only way to change the society is to stay in and have a vote but how many votes are counted, only the ones who can get to the agm's which amounts to what? about 250 members. Not democratic in this day and age, I believe it is easy enough to set up an electronic system to do so and the majority of people are on email so what is the problem. I see Phillipa and her branch would like a vote to find out what the members think and hers is not the only branch to think this way.

Loyaulte me Lie

Christine