Hedgehog wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Richard III usually dies of plague in York before anyone can get to him.

Usually?

 reds8n wrote:

Note to developers, maybe have a poke around before you start paving eh?

Quite.

When we revamped the town centre afew ... it was that long ago ?! --- err... several years back there special effort made to try and conserve and investigate what they could.


http://www.whitefriars-canterbury.co.uk/about-whitefriars/?PageID=11

It was great to see it all unfold. There was extra interest as "Time Team" came down and did some filming too.

Had a couple of pints with Tony Robinson et al

 Hedgehog wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Not quite. The entire set up was a direct slap in the face to Lee but the mansion is still on site (and quite lovely to look at)

 sebster wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Not quite. The entire set up was a direct slap in the face to Lee but the mansion is still on site (and quite lovely to look at)

Arlington is a really cool place to visit. Strange though to be looking at history, to see Audie Murphy's grave or JFK's, and then see a flag draped coffin being taken to a new burial spot, and then later here the gun shots. History is still happening, I guess.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I can't really think of it as a historical place, maybe as a veteran with friends there I'm in a different frame of mind when I visit the cemetery

 sebster wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
I can't really think of it as a historical place, maybe as a veteran with friends there I'm in a different frame of mind when I visit the cemetery

That's a good way of expressing what I was getting at. To me I wanted to see Arlington House and the burial places of the Kennedys and other historical people. But there's people still being buried there today, most of whom died too soon, and the juxtaposition is powerful. I can only imagine that feeling would be greater when you've got friends buried there.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Relevant to my experiences with serving on a funeral detail and the like:

Spoiler:

The Non-Combat Veteran's Lament

another set of rifle shots
echo in my heart
a salute comes up
as the casket lowers down

another folded flag
in to a grieving widow's arms
the sound of taps echoes
as the bugler begins to mourn

another brother fallen
in the thick of the fight
blood on the sands
in the dark of the night

men torn and mangled
by the bloody course of war
families destroyed and shredded
devastated ever more

I sometimes turn on myself
in the darkness of my mind
why was I so lucky?
simply to have survived?

my brothers lost and scattered
but my ticket never came
my rotation never happened
so now I sit in shame

I feel my honor is diminished
for not taking the same risks as they
a coward not a warrior
for not having the chance to stand

I accept the cast of fate
no matter what the cost
and in my survival know I must
forever remember the lost

over three thousand of my brothers
sent to their eternal sleep
I ask a god I don't believe in
for their souls to keep

I'll remember if no one else
the sacrifices made
which is why I stand here
at this unmourned grave

this is the task I set myself
to be a survivor with out shame
to tell the stories of the fallen
and share their immortal fame

Source: Me

Having solved one of the greatest mysteries of British history, scientists desperate to unearth the next one and confirm if Richard III did murder the princes in the tower have been left disappointed.
Previously secret documents show that the Church of England, backed by the Queen, has for 20 years refused repeated requests by experts to test skeletons believed to be the Tudor successors buried in Westminster Abbey.
And it appears they will not be changing their minds after the University of Leicester announced to the world this week that the skeleton found under a council car park in Leicester is that of Richard III.

Those in charge of Wesminster Abbey will not allow the same forensic tests used to identify the former king to be tried on remains there.
Their argument is that it could set a precedent for testing any number of historical theories linked to the many famous people buried at the church.

Clerics are also concerned what they will do with the bones if they are found not to belong to who they thought they did.

Richard, depicted by William Shakespeare as a monstrous tyrant who murdered two princes in the Tower of London, died at the Battle of Bosworth Field, defeated by an army led by Henry Tudor.
The king's nephews Edward and Richard were kept in the Tower of London, according to history recorded at the time, and 'stifled with pillows by the order of their perfidious uncle Richard the Usurper', according to the inscription on the urn their remains are kept in.
Leicester University's Turi King said this week they could take DNA from the princes and match it with Richard III to find if they were related.
But a Westminster Abbey spokeswoman told the Guardian: 'The recent discovery of Richard III does not change the abbey's position, which is that the mortal remains of two young children, widely believed since the 17th century to be the princes in tower, should not be disturbed.'
The Richard III Society, who were behind this week's confirmation of the monarch's identity, tried twice to get the urn opened in 1993 with the BBC and in 1995 with Channel 4.
But the Dean of Westminster the Very Rev Michael Mayne refused to allow carbon dating and DNA testing to get to the bottom of the mystery.
In 1993 he took advice from academics and experts who said the techniques would only age the bones to within 50 years, and as Richard III only reigned from 1483 to 1485 it would not be accurate enough.
'It could not therefore differentiate between Richard III or Henry VII – or another – being the guilty party. Nor would the C/14 technique give any clue as to the age at death of the children,' the Dean said.
The Palace and Home Secretary at the time, Michael Howard, were all consulted and were in 'full agreement'.

In 1995, dealing with the Channel 4 request, the Dean then admitted science had moved along further but could cause even more problems if he agreed to testing.
'A sample of bone (skin/hair/tissue) from a known individual related to the princes would be required, and that almost certainly means opening a second tomb in the Abbey or elsewhere. If the result is positive, the remains of the two princes are placed back in Sir Christopher Wren's urn. But what if they are negative: what do we do with the remains?' he said.
'Keep them in the urn in the royal chapels, knowing they are bogus, or re-bury them elsewhere? And what would we have gained, other than to satisfy our curiosity in one area. It would not bring us any nearer the truth of the affair.
'There are others buried in the abbey whose identity is somewhat uncertain, including Richard II, and allowing these bones to be examined could well set a precedent for other requests. I do not believe we are in the business of satisfying curiosity, or of certifying that remains in the abbey tombs are what they are said to be.'

 reds8n wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
but it seems that every time we are digging somewhere we find left over bombs.

Semi regular occurrence in London and our cities, we also get a few mines washed up on the beaches and the like.

I guess USA archaeology is in kind of an odd place as the answer to "who built this..?" is going to be " My great great grandfather." .. which.. well... lacks a certain romance in some regards.

That said I believe there's quite a wealth of native american history to be explored like


http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/uncovering-americas-pyramid-builders#.URDjxR1LMwo


but I gather especially when it comes to things like burial sites this is something of a delicate issue..?

 captain collius wrote:
Hey not all american have no history my family has been here for almost 400 years after we fled europe as deposed nobles because my ancestor tried to overthrow the pope.