Richard III's DNA offers intriguing questions about parentage

Apparently the X DNA of Richard III's identified remains matches his mother's side but the Y DNA does not match his father's side, This is a problem (well it was one that was  covered up). It looks like his kingly father was not his biological father. Also, his DNA is that for a blond with blue eyes, not someone with the dark hair seen in the Richard III portraits. Scientists admit blond hair can darken over time. Maybe he dyed it? Of course now people are questioning the line of royal succession before and after him, but they are all gone so what does that really matter now? Aren't bones fascinating? There has been a lot of interesting analysis done since his bones were found under the parking lot that shows what he ate, how he lived, his physical state with his severely twisted spine,  how well he could have ridden and fought well in war with the saddles of the day, and now this-questionable parentage via DNA. If nothing else we will all think of Richard III as more of a human being and a fascinating scientific study than we did before his bones were dug up. Read more about it here


Popular posts from this blog

Off to MAA Conference

Cassie and Leonard Oil Co. objects