Do you think more DNA testing should be done in order to solve some royal mysteries?

Question

Now that Richard III has been identified, should research be carried out on the two skeletons found in the Tower? It might also be interesting to know how many illegitimate children Henry VIII really had, and so on and so forth.

If you approve, which royal mystery would you like to have solved? Please, exclude anybody still alive.

Answer 1

I would certainly like to know about the boys in the tower. However, you can't always find DNA in old bones, and you have to have something to compare it to. The easiest way is through mitochondrial DNA, which goes through the mother's line, not the fathers, so Richard's DNA probably isn't terribly helpful here.



There is no way of knowing how many illegitimate kids Henry had. We have to suspect someone was his kid to even think of testing them, and he really wasn't rumored to have many. Then, of course, you need permission to unbury them and find DNA and find DNA to compare it with.



Identifying the boys in the tower would have historical significance. After all, one was a king. Their fate is also a mystery, so studying their bones can be considered a way of putting them fully to rest. Digging up people to see if they were illegitimate doesn't gain us much and is arguably disrespectful.



Edit: No one seriously believes Elizabeth was a male imposter. The entire scenario is ridiculous. And you wouldn't need DNA. You could just look at her skeleton. Male and female skeletons are obviously different.

Answer 2

I'm with you re the Princes in the Tower and over time, perhaps this will be done in light of what they discovered re Richard III. It might be interesting to find out about Queen Elizabeth I - whether she was daughter of Henry, or a male impostor!!! Otherwise I truly believe much of this should be left well alone and remain a mystery.

Answer 3

Well, certain succession and alternative succession issues hinge -- though only theoretically -- on the question of Edward IV's paternity. That might be an interesting avenue of investigation. Did Edward IV and Richard III have the same father?



Clara, the poster asked that anyone still alive be excluded. Please read with greater care.

Answer 4

yes there are some interesting ones ,other than the skeletons in the tower another one who would be interesting to research would be Richard of Eastwell ,a reclusive bricklayer who claimed to be the son of Richard III

Answer 5

As you said, the Princes in the Tower would be interesting. However, if the skeletons turned out to be theirs, it would be unlikely to shed light on who was responsible for their deaths.



A grave found in Winchester is currently being linked to King Alfred the Great.

Answer 6

Absolutely. I would really like to know whether or not Count Saltykov was Paul I's biological father. And is the mummified body in Fårevejle really the Earl of Bothwell's?

Answer 7

The man in the iron mask; would like to know if he was indeed King Louis's twin brother.

Answer 8

Interestingly enough I'm currently doing my research for my Master's degree and PhD degree... I coukdjust squeeze in that royal research anytime.

Answer 9

No. Anyone who claims to be royal should be endowed large sums of money and never be expected to work.

Answer 10

______________________



" Going on , as we speak . "

______________________