Objectively speaking, this will be an interesting test case. Whether or not this type of investigation will become a possible go to solution for some large surname projects where the members of several haplogroups and/or sub-clades of a haplogroup are claiming the same ancestor will be dependent on whether or not viable YDNA may be extracted and sequenced and/or SNP scanned from the remains. YDNA isn't nearly as easy to obtain and it degrades quite quickly. The Y of the car park body AKA Richard III hasn't yet progressed; that said the burial conditions between the two bodies is significantly different and in the case of the Barrymore remains, more recent. It also would be interesting to know exactly how it was that permissions for such examination occurred to begin with. I dare say that many would like to retrieve remains interred at Iona to settle some claims, but that likely will not happen; and in general, I believe the powers that be more or less have similar opinions on the matter as Malcolm in believing that such examinations may go too far to satisfy curiosity. Is direct documented family involved? I do not know enough regarding the circumstances leading to this investigation to know any more than what has been published about it. I haven't seen much discussion anywhere, so what the varying opinions outside of what has been discussed here, I don't know. None the less, regardless of opinion, I think there is much to learn from this, and I too am interested in knowing the outcome. Susan On 6/15/2014 10:45 AM, Michael McNally wrote: > I think we should take advantage of every opportunity we have to examine the DNA of old remains if there is a paper trail to it. If we just sit back and philosophize on the negatives and positives, there will be no opportunity to see if our work has actual validity. > > Mike McNally > f198682 > > > >