+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! (/showthread.php?tid=4737)
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Unitof1 - 5th February 2013
could be anti dna contamination...
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - GnomeKing - 5th February 2013
HRH RIII, RIP(s)....hmmm
maybe this could go back in the National Planning Policy Framework please?
"⢠contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past by capturing evidence from the historic environment and making this publicly available, "
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Dinosaur - 6th February 2013
Unitof1 Wrote:could be anti dna contamination...
No probs with the bags (they make hoovering the van out easier afterwards), but with any of the skellies you get round here, just using bags = bags of unidentifiable bonemeal at the other end. If the spine was so interesting, why not lift it in 1 piece on a board, would have resolved the 'arrowhead' issue for a start....what was with the paper suits and facemasks, no one else on teh site seemed to need them (or are they all now dead?) - playing to the cameras?
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Unitof1 - 6th February 2013
still the paper suits might be claimed on cross dna contamination terms. Not sure that lifing on a board is up to much. First off you have to dig around the grave cut context and destroy it. Seems that they did not have much space and it appears that rickees feet had been truncated although I did not see any pictures which showed that this truncation had been excavated or extended much lower than the grave cut? As for the nail-possible roman? only the excavation could make any claims as to where it rested amounst the skeleton.
Truth is there was no real archaeological digging details- modus opparandy etc given that might be interesting to a digging archaeologist. If anything I feel sorry for the diggers that I saw on the programe where whats probably not funny is that they are producing copyrights but those making the film are probably making a lot more out of their copyrights than the diggers? and royalties from repeating the program. Nick Ashton made a point that he felt that he should have controled more of the production when at tyme teams...Maybe archaeologists should go full hog and see all our record making as making a record for television and charge accordingly for it. Museums seem to treat most archaeology as entertainment, why dont we just admit it. Its a pity at the moment that we have to come accross as people who whack a skele with a jcb and then go around wareing paper suits for no given reason and then after we have produced the goods and been stared at in a trench to have all their work and copyright then possessed by some wonderful no doubt mifa RO director and other possible very important beings who stode around and tried to look as gormless as the presenter. I appologise if it was a genetic face deformaty.
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Dinosaur - 6th February 2013
Unitof1 Wrote:As for the nail-possible roman? only the excavation could make any claims as to where it rested amounst the skeleton.
Lifting on a board means X-ray/scan while still in original articulation, so position of the nail would have been certain and no chance of 'making up' any spinal curvature later (or indeed the need to, although I suppose TV pics count as good evidence) - would have been a good 'a**e-covering' approach. Agree that it's a right **** getting boards under stuff though. Most of the leg end and left side of the torso - parts of the cut looked to have been t***ed by the machine at the outset anyway. But I suppose still better than the time-honoured method of digging skellies in the machine bucket...oops!
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - GnomeKing - 6th February 2013
more than that - would have show people how it could be done properly....oh well, my toddler-niece wants to put him back together, but is concerned about the missing feet-bones...lol.
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Unitof1 - 6th February 2013
not sure what you mean by position of nail would be certain or how it could be done properly. Seems to me that a method of exavation was used and recorded. Looked to me that there was lots of gaps between the bones with small stone between them yet I doubt that anybody would go around saying that rickee was stoned to death by peagrit.. Can wonder if the corrosion of the nail showed evidence of a shroud or clothing around the body-although there did seem to be a claim that the nail was roman so the corrosion was ancient. Probably whats more to the point is was all of the grave fill retained even if it had been mattacked and over machined. I wonder how long it took to excavate and how long was it left exposed before being lifted. Did anybody throw a bunch of flowers into the grave?
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - BAJR - 7th February 2013
Excellent piece :
Quote:TYPICAL. You wait 528 years for one dead king, then three come along at once.
On Monday, archaeologists proudly proclaimed that the skeleton found underneath a car park in Leicester is definitely that of Richard III of England. Now, there is already excited talk of having a proper ferret around for Alfred the Great of Wessex and even Henry I of England, whose bodies have also gone awol over the centuries.
No-one loves history more than me, and I’ve been watching the developments surrounding Richard’s exhumation with great interest, but if we start digging up all the monarchs who missed out on a nice tomb, there are going to be quite a few car-parks turned over before we’re finished.
Frankly, I find it strange how many people are demanding that Richard be given a big funeral – some even want a state funeral – when all that’s happened is that we’ve found a bunch of bones that used to be a king.
It doesn’t hurt to recall that Richard wasn’t actually buried in a car park. He was laid to rest, with suitable religious rites, in Leicester’s Grey Friars Church (like a lot of other people, who we’re not bothering to dig up, because they weren’t royal enough). It’s nobody’s fault – well, perhaps Henry VIII’s – that the church isn’t there any more. A state funeral would be redundant, since the state of which Richard was sovereign disappeared in 1707. Besides, he catastrophically lost his crown in battle, so he couldn’t very well expect an all-singing, all-wailing wake at Westminster Abbey, could he? Given the circumstances, his original resting place wasn’t too shabby at all. I doubt that Haile Selassie would have complained.
Read on>>
http://www.scotsman.com/news/fiona-mccade-some-royal-skeletons-are-best-left-hidden-1-2777611
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - Dinosaur - 7th February 2013
Unitof1 Wrote:...rickee was stoned to death by peagrit...
The Bard might have had trouble with that one...cue the audience flicking popcorn at Lord Olivier?...
Rickeeeeeeeeeeeee! - BAJR - 8th February 2013
Read the small print!
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/battle-for-richard-s-burial-is-long-lost-1-5390346
[h=1]Battle for Richard’s burial is long lost[/h]
Published on Friday 8 February 2013 05:00
The battle for the final resting place of King Richard III seems already won after it was revealed the decision is in the hands of university experts.
It was confirmed yesterday it is up to the University of Leicester to decide where he should be buried as it had been granted permission to exhume the monarch’s body.
The news came as York Minster rejected calls for the King to be laid to rest there.
More than 11,000 people have signed a petition calling for Richard to be re-interred in York and York Council is writing to the Queen and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to lay claim to the remains of the last Plantagenet king.
But yesterday the MoJ said an archaeological exhumation licence had been issued which required details of where the remains would be laid to rest.
It said: “The licence we issued states that [the University of Leicester] would, no later than August 31, 2014, deposit the remains at Jewry Wall Museum or have them interred at St Martin’s Cathedral or in a burial ground in which interments may legally take place. The precise location of reburial is now for the University of Leicester.”