[Merged] Plans to dig up Alfred the Great and Henry I

[Still Waters]

After all the excitement surrounding the identification of King Richard III's skeleton, which was exhumed from a car park in Leicester, scientists are turning their attention to an even earlier king - Alfred the Great.

A team of archaeologists and researchers are applying for permission to dig up the unmarked grave where the bones of the Anglo-Saxon king, who ruled from 871 until 899, are thought to lie.

http://www.dailymail...l#axzz2K4CBSSUt

[spud the mackem]

What about King Arthur and his mate Merlin, now that would be a find.

[wimfloppp]

I dont see how they could tell if they were the bones of alfred the great unless they have the d.n.a evidence of relatives.

[spud the mackem]

How many Kings / Queens of Britain are lost in the mists of time ? where is Boadicea, Ethelred and a few more.What is the point of disturbing old graves ? pretty gruesome I reckon.....

[Ealdwita]

The original source of the ‘King’s Cross’ legend may have been the Lewis Spence book – ‘Boadicea, Warrior Queen of the Britons’ published in 1937. Spence was a folklorist and writer on the occult and psuedohistorical subjects, not noted for his historical accuracy! (Although her army did burn that area to the ground, as stated above.)

A ‘triple’ grave was excavated at Birdlip in Gloucestershire in the late 19^thCent, along with female grave goods dating to the 1^stCent. AD which was claimed to be the final resting place of Boudicca and her two daughters. But no definitive proof has ever been offered. The region was the home of the Dobunni during the Late Iron Age and there’s evidence of trade and marriage connections them and Boudicca’s Iceni.

It’s little wonder that her grave is proving difficult to pinpoint when you consider Boudicca is only mentioned by two historians (Tacitus – for the original story, and Dio Cassius, who embellished Tacitus’ work some years later.) Eminent later historians such as Bede and Geoffrey of Monmouth seemed unaware of her, and she remained in the shadows until Tacitus’ records were rediscovered in medieval Europe during the Renaissance.

Sadly, my money’s on cremation, a mass grave, or a lonely hollow of earth in woodland somewhere.

BTW, her name was derived from the Celtic word ‘Bouda’ – ‘Victory’. The name ‘Boadicea’ is most likely a mistranscription from Tacitus.

[Ealdwita]

What about King Arthur and his mate Merlin, now that would be a find.

Gerald of Wales, a Medieval historian writes in his 'Liber de Principis Instructione' (C.1193), that Glastonbury monks had uncovered a hollowed-out log containing two bodies, while digging between two stone pyramids standing together in the abbey cemetary. The log coffin had been buried quite deep, at around 16 feet down. A stone slab cover had been found at the seven foot level, and attached to its underside was an oddly shaped cross with a latin inscription on it, naming the occupants of the coffin as the renowned King Arthur and his queen, Guinevere.

The motives for this being a 'monastic hoax' is overwhelming though. .....

The monks' beloved abbey church, the most glorious in all England and possibly in all of Christendom, had been destroyed by fire in 1184, just a few short years before.

The abbey's greatest pilgrim attraction, the "Old Church," England's oldest Christian structure which dated back many hundreds of years, had been burned up with it.

the abbey's chief benefactor, the recently deceased Henry II, was no longer in a position to finance their efforts to rebuild and the new king, Richard, was more interested in using his money to go "Crusading."

A popular legend, current among the British people, claimed that King Arthur had never actually died and that he would one day return to his people when their need was great. While it is easy for modern people to discount a story like that, the twelfth century was an age of great credulity, and since no one could point to the location of Arthur's actual burial place, the legend couldn't be so easily discounted. Amazingly enough, no one had ever even claimed to know where the grave was, let alone try to identify it.

The historian, William of Malmesbury, confirms that the whereabouts of Arthur's burial place is unknown, and that silly legends have been created as a result:

". . .tomb of Arthur is nowhere beheld, whence the ancient ditties fable that he is yet to come."

Hoax? Who knows? No other (even vaguely credible) suggestions have been forthcoming over the years.

(My files - More info available)

................................................................................................

Merlin's final resting place? Take your pick (no pun intended)!........

A pile of rocks in.....

Drumelzier, Scottish Borders

Bryn Myrddn, Carmarthen, Wales

Stonehenge, Wiltshire

Tintagel, Cornwall

Alderley Edge, nr. Manchester

Marlborough, Wiltshire

Bardsey Island (Avalon?) Wales

And when you've dug that lot, come back for another list. OK?

Edited February 8, 2013 by ealdwita

[spud the mackem]

Gerald of Wales, a Medieval historian writes in his 'Liber de Principis Instructione' (C.1193), that Glastonbury monks had uncovered a hollowed-out log containing two bodies, while digging between two stone pyramids standing together in the abbey cemetary. The log coffin had been buried quite deep, at around 16 feet down. A stone slab cover had been found at the seven foot level, and attached to its underside was an oddly shaped cross with a latin inscription on it, naming the occupants of the coffin as the renowned King Arthur and his queen, Guinevere.

The motives for this being a 'monastic hoax' is overwhelming though. .....

The monks' beloved abbey church, the most glorious in all England and possibly in all of Christendom, had been destroyed by fire in 1184, just a few short years before.

The abbey's greatest pilgrim attraction, the "Old Church," England's oldest Christian structure which dated back many hundreds of years, had been burned up with it.

the abbey's chief benefactor, the recently deceased Henry II, was no longer in a position to finance their efforts to rebuild and the new king, Richard, was more interested in using his money to go "Crusading."

A popular legend, current among the British people, claimed that King Arthur had never actually died and that he would one day return to his people when their need was great. While it is easy for modern people to discount a story like that, the twelfth century was an age of great credulity, and since no one could point to the location of Arthur's actual burial place, the legend couldn't be so easily discounted. Amazingly enough, no one had ever even claimed to know where the grave was, let alone try to identify it.

The historian, William of Malmesbury, confirms that the whereabouts of Arthur's burial place is unknown, and that silly legends have been created as a result:

". . .tomb of Arthur is nowhere beheld, whence the ancient ditties fable that he is yet to come."

Hoax? Who knows? No other (even vaguely credible) suggestions have been forthcoming over the years.

(My files - More info available)

................................................................................................

Merlin's final resting place? Take your pick (no pun intended)!........

A pile of rocks in.....

Drumelzier, Scottish Borders

Bryn Myrddn, Carmarthen, Wales

Stonehenge, Wiltshire

Tintagel, Cornwall

Alderley Edge, nr. Manchester

Marlborough, Wiltshire

Bardsey Island (Avalon?) Wales

And when you've dug that lot, come back for another list. OK?

Thanks for the info, I guess I wont bother with a pick,(re your pun),some say Arthur is in a tomb underneath the ruins of the Abbey on Glastonbury Hill,according to the local "wurzels" around here.(Aarrh me babbee,'E lies not in the groun' but in a tomb unner the Groun'..)

[TheLastLazyGun]

It could be the year for discovering notorious monarchs.

Just weeks after remains found under a car park were confirmed as Richard III, archaeologists now believe they may just have stumbled on Alfred the Great, King of Wessex between 871 and 899.

Amid great secrecy, a team exhumed an unmarked grave at a more fitting location for a Royal burial - a churchyard in Winchester, the former capital of Wessex, named in ancient documents as his burial place.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2OlpWbZpf

Edited March 27, 2013 by Waspie_Dwarf
2c. Plagiarism and copyright: If you quote text from an external web site then please always provide a source link. Members are asked to copy only as much as is necessary when quoting material from external sources

[Ealdwita]

Possibly, but it's not going to be as easy to prove as Richard III was.

[Ever Learning]

my friend was literally talking about alfred the other day and wondering how likely it is that he would be related to him. hopefully we can find out in the future

[No Censorship]

I dont see how they could tell if they were the bones of alfred the great unless they have the d.n.a evidence of relatives.

Have they located his descendants? I take it that his haplotype would be I or R1b (from the continent, not insular). Disturbing graves is wrong IMO, but it would be great to discover that you're related to him. They could call on you when the Vikings invade again.