And now we see 'the face'

[charlie_cochrane]

Stunning facial reconstruction of Richard III. Too easy to make daft comments like "very modern looking" so I won't.

Comments

[helenajust.livejournal.com]

I wish the presenter of last night's programme had done even a little research before he started - his ignorance was shameful, especially given that he must have known that he was meeting a serious member of the Richard III Society. All he had to do was spend an hour on their website!

They could have used some of the time he wasted doing Shakespeare in telling us some of the basic facts - such as the reasons given at the time for Richard's becoming king in place of his nephew, and who benefitted most from the disappearance of the Princes (he or Henry Tudor). But the science was good; I wondered why they didn't do the carbon dating first, as if that was in the wrong ballpark they wouldn't have needed to do the rest (maybe they did, and the programme showed it out of sequence).

And I liked the reconstruction - having seen her work before, I trust the person who did it. Josephine Tey's Alan Grant would have had the same reaction to it as he did to the portrait, I think!

[charliecochrane.livejournal.com]

I didn't watch it - glad I made that decision, now. I get very angry with half baked presenters. Glad the science was good, as that's the bit I usually rant at.

The problem I've found with any books about that era is they're always written with a bias, pro or anti Richard, so as a poor humble biologist I can't tell if I'm being given a fair report.