Speaking of Examining Remains
Speaking of Examining Remains
2006-02-14 23:04:39
Just received this Google Alert re: the examination of fragments from
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-microscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-microscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Speaking of Examining Remains
2006-02-15 04:48:07
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of William
Barber
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:04 PM
To: A. Richard III Society
Subject: Speaking of Examining Remains
Just received this Google Alert re: the examination of fragments from
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-m
icroscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
_____
Well, good grief, I say.
Seeing as how any of Joan's remains were diligently destroyed to prevent
any relic-collecting, *if* these belong to Joan, whoever took them had
to be pretty sly and quick.
Maria
elena@...
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of William
Barber
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:04 PM
To: A. Richard III Society
Subject: Speaking of Examining Remains
Just received this Google Alert re: the examination of fragments from
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-m
icroscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
_____
Well, good grief, I say.
Seeing as how any of Joan's remains were diligently destroyed to prevent
any relic-collecting, *if* these belong to Joan, whoever took them had
to be pretty sly and quick.
Maria
elena@...
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Speaking of Examining Remains
2006-02-15 11:15:06
Maria
My feeling is that the chances of these being Joan's remains, and only Joan's remains, is pretty low.
In John Rohl's book, 'Purple Secret', about porphyria in the British royal family and some of Queen Victoria's German descendants, there is a whole lot about DNA testing of remains. One grave in what is now Poland was opened somewhat surreptitiously and bits of bone removed for testing. Some of them confirmed genetic links with the lady's known relations, but some showed no match at all - reason, she had been buried with her husband and their remains had become mixed up. And she had only been buried in 1945 - what are the chances like after nearly 600 years when the deceased's remains were incomplete and hastily buried to start with? It may be useful to mention that the remains of Tsar Nicholas II and his family found in Russia few years ago are not only their incomplete and burnt remains but also those of their doctor and some of their servants who were shot with them.
Ann
Maria <ejbronte@...> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of William
Barber
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:04 PM
To: A. Richard III Society
Subject: Speaking of Examining Remains
Just received this Google Alert re: the examination of fragments from
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-m
icroscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
_____
Well, good grief, I say.
Seeing as how any of Joan's remains were diligently destroyed to prevent
any relic-collecting, *if* these belong to Joan, whoever took them had
to be pretty sly and quick.
Maria
elena@...
SPONSORED LINKS
United kingdom calling card United kingdom flower delivery Call united kingdom United kingdom phone card United kingdom hotel United kingdom vacation
---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
My feeling is that the chances of these being Joan's remains, and only Joan's remains, is pretty low.
In John Rohl's book, 'Purple Secret', about porphyria in the British royal family and some of Queen Victoria's German descendants, there is a whole lot about DNA testing of remains. One grave in what is now Poland was opened somewhat surreptitiously and bits of bone removed for testing. Some of them confirmed genetic links with the lady's known relations, but some showed no match at all - reason, she had been buried with her husband and their remains had become mixed up. And she had only been buried in 1945 - what are the chances like after nearly 600 years when the deceased's remains were incomplete and hastily buried to start with? It may be useful to mention that the remains of Tsar Nicholas II and his family found in Russia few years ago are not only their incomplete and burnt remains but also those of their doctor and some of their servants who were shot with them.
Ann
Maria <ejbronte@...> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of William
Barber
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:04 PM
To: A. Richard III Society
Subject: Speaking of Examining Remains
Just received this Google Alert re: the examination of fragments from
Joan of Arc:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/saints-preserved-joans-bones-under-m
icroscope/2006/02/14/1139890738506.html
_____
Well, good grief, I say.
Seeing as how any of Joan's remains were diligently destroyed to prevent
any relic-collecting, *if* these belong to Joan, whoever took them had
to be pretty sly and quick.
Maria
elena@...
SPONSORED LINKS
United kingdom calling card United kingdom flower delivery Call united kingdom United kingdom phone card United kingdom hotel United kingdom vacation
---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------