This blog is an archive of posts from 2013, as details of the dig in Leicester emerged.
The identification of the remains in Leicester as Richard III left many questions unanswered. The essays and articles on this page ask questions about the evidence and the conclusions. Please note that the burden of proof lies with those who assert that the skeleton is Richard III beyond reasonable doubt. To refute this claim it is only necessary to show that there is reasonable doubt.
The Judgment of Richard III
We lose sight of our purpose in pursuing the life and character of Richard III, when we make such a fuss about whether his bones have, or have not, been found. The Lord God Almighty knows where the remains of his child are laid and will raise him to glory at the last day.
What matters is the truth. Digging out bones does not tell us whether he was a malicious deceiver, who engineered the death of his brother, Clarence, stabbed Henry VI to death with his own hand, murdered his nephews, stole the crown, poisoned his wife, lusted after his niece and died manfully fighting those, who had betrayed him.
These, and these alone, make the man. And these elements are outside the competence of pseudo-scientific methodology. These matters cannot be decided with mattocks and DNA.
~ John L. Fox