Royal Autopsy With Professor Alice Roberts

Starting Tuesday 2nd April 9pm Sky History

In this Sky HISTORY Original, Royal Autopsy returns for a second series as Professor Alice Roberts and Dr Brett Lockyer investigate the causes of death of four of Britain’s most famous monarchs; King George IV, Queen Mary I, King Henry IV and Queen Anne. At the heart of each investigation is a detailed ‘as real’ autopsy led by Forensic Pathologist Dr Brett Lockyer




Series one you can still watch, featuring Jim Carver

 


Does knowing the cause of death of a monarch shed any real light on anything/ Owing to their position and status they were untypical people living untypical lives so you are not going to be able to draw any general conclusions about how the majority of people would have lived and died during their reign .

It would be interesting to discover if King Harold (Godwinson) did get an arrow in the eye or if he was chopped to pieces and mutilated by a gang of Norman hitmen which is much more likely. But then William The Bastard had the King's body disposed of.
 
Does knowing the cause of death of a monarch shed any real light on anything/ Owing to their position and status they were untypical people living untypical lives so you are not going to be able to draw any general conclusions about how the majority of people would have lived and died during their reign .

It would be interesting to discover if King Harold (Godwinson) did get an arrow in the eye or if he was chopped to pieces and mutilated by a gang of Norman hitmen which is much more likely. But then William The Bastard had the King's body disposed of.
Was it not both?
 
It would be interesting to discover if King Harold (Godwinson) did get an arrow in the eye or if he was chopped to pieces and mutilated by a gang of Norman hitmen which is much more likely. But then William The Bastard had the King's body disposed of.

The Bayeux tapestry isn't exactly an eye-witness account so we can never know. Also it is not known why there are 93 penises depicted on the tapestry. 88 of them belong to horses like but you can imagine someone saying "careful, you'll have someone's eye out with that"
 
I think she's absolutely lovely and I love her books and TV programmes.

However, I think it sounds dreadful repeatedly referring to her as Professor Alice Roberts. She even introduced herself as that when she did the Christmas RI Lectures. I know it's her title and should be on web pages, correspondence and that... but I think it looks really cluttered on TV.
 
Was it not both?
IT's not clear from the Tapestry if the man with the arrow in his eye is Harold or if its is the man picture being cut down by Norman knights next ti him. Add to that there is some evidence that that arrow was added to the tapestry quite some years after it had been embroidered.

Further to that in the accounts of the Battle of Stamford which Harold Goodwinson had fought against an invading Viking army only a couple of weeks before Hastings it is recorded that the viking leader king Harold Hardrada was kill by and arrow to the eye. It's a bit of a coincidence having two kings called Harold being killed in battle a few miles apart & within days of one another and both by an arrow to the eye,

I think the arrow story is very unlikely and was meant as a symbolic death - the victim having his eye struck out by the hand of God, It was meant to demonstrate that Harold Godwinson was unfit to be King as he had broken the holy oath that he allegedly made to William and that William therefore had God'd approval.
 
I think she's absolutely lovely and I love her books and TV programmes.

However, I think it sounds dreadful repeatedly referring to her as Professor Alice Roberts. She even introduced herself as that when she did the Christmas RI Lectures. I know it's her title and should be on web pages, correspondence and that... but I think it looks really cluttered on TV.
There is a tendency with female presenters to focus on how they look - see this thread for evidence - and to detract from their professional expertise and that may be why she has preferred to use her professional status in her public branding. Just a guess.
 
There is a tendency with female presenters to focus on how they look - see this thread for evidence - and to detract from their professional expertise and that may be why she has preferred to use her professional status in her public branding. Just a guess.
That’s a really good point. Hadn’t occurred to me.
 
There is a tendency with female presenters to focus on how they look - see this thread for evidence - and to detract from their professional expertise and that may be why she has preferred to use her professional status in her public branding. Just a guess.
Do you think how she looks has anything to do with her popularity and TV appeal or is it all down to her academic credentials ? Maybe shes happy enough to accept the credit for being both attractive and smart without one detracting from the other.
 
Do you think how she looks has anything to do with her popularity and TV appeal or is it all down to her academic credentials ? Maybe shes happy enough to accept the credit for being both attractive and smart without one detracting from the other.
Like you I am just guessing at why she might have decided to emphasise her academic status. Equally it could be something that is current just now because Brian Cox is usually Professor Brian Cox.
 

Back
Top