On February 4, 2013, Leicester University confirmed the identity of the Greyfriars skeleton found in September 2012 as that of Richard III. Natasha Sheldon of History and Archaeology Online was present at the press announcement that revealed the defining evidence that identified the lost King, as well as details of his life, death, and burial.
Richard III: Evidence from the Greyfriars Skeleton
Radiocarbon dating of samples from the rib bones by the Universities of Oxford and Glasgow proved that the individual was of high status, consuming a high protein diet rich in seafood. The samples also placed the date of death between 1455 and 1540, which covers the period of Richard III’s death in 1485. Computed tomography (CT) scans proved that the skeleton and the King died at a similar age – the skeleton’s age at death was its early 30s, and Richard III died at the age of 32.
Analysis of the Greyfriars skeleton by Leicester University osteoarchaeologist Dr. Jo Appleby and the East Midlands Forensic Pathology Unit under Professor Guy Rutty revealed similar characteristics expected of Richard III. At 5 foot 8 inches, the skeleton was that of a tall, slender man.
“This is in keeping with historical sources which describe Richard as being of very slender build,” said Dr. Jo Appleby at the press conference. This height was probably diminished by a spinal deformity. The skeleton suffered from a condition known as scoliosis, which would have led to the right shoulder being higher than the left. It seems that the individual was not born this way, but would have developed the condition after the age of 10. Although scoliosis is not the same condition, this could explain where Richard III’s reputation as a hunchback came from.
DNA Evidence & The Greyfriars Skeleton
DNA proved to be the key to identifying the skeleton. The DNA evidence was examined by Dr. Turi King at Leicester and York Universities and verified in Toulouse. “DNA breaks down over time,” said Dr. King at the press conference, “and how quickly this happens is very dependent on the burial conditions. Therefore, we were extremely pleased to find that we could obtain a DNA sample from the skeletal remains.”
The Greyfriars skeleton’s ancient DNA was compared to samples from modern descendants of Richard III’s female relatives. Professor Kevin Schurer was tasked with verifying possible descendant Michael Ibsen’s descent. But he also began another search. “Right from the start of the project, we did not want to rely entirely on the DNA between Michael and the skeleton,” said Professor Schurer at the press conference. “We set about trying to secure a second maternal line, and after several weeks of research we actually discovered this person.”
The DNA of this anonymous descendant was compared to that of Michael Ibsen, confirming the family connection. The next step was to compare the modern DNA with that of the skeleton. “The DNA sequence obtained from the Greyfriar skeletal remains was compared with the two maternal line relatives of Richard III,” said Dr. King. “We were very excited to find that there is a DNA match between the maternal DNA from the family of Richard III and the skeletal remains we found at the Greyfriars dig.”
The Death of Richard III
The body had 10 wounds: 8 on the skull and 2 elsewhere. Leicester University’s Department of Engineering obtained micro-computed X-rays of the skull in order to work with high-resolution images of the head injuries. A wound found on the top of the head has now been confirmed as a non-fatal direct blow from a weapon, rather than from the impact of the helmet. Two of the other head wounds were potentially fatal.
“A large wound at the base of the skull at the back represents a ‘slice’ cut off by a bladed weapon,” said Dr. Appleby. “We cannot say for certain exactly what weapon caused this injury, but it is consistent with something similar to a halberd. A smaller injury also on the base of the skull was caused by a bladed weapon which penetrated through the inner surface of the skull opposite the entry point, a distance of 10.5 cm. Both these injuries would have caused almost instant loss of consciousness and death would have followed quickly afterward.”
Several other wounds on the body seem to have been made by a dagger rather than a sword or halberd. They include marks on the cheekbone, consistent with the cheek being pierced, a cut along the lower jaw, a cut along the ribs and an injury to the right hip bone consistent with a stab wound in the buttocks.
In Dr. Appleby’s opinion, these are “humiliation wounds“- deliberate injuries inflicted on the dead body of a defeated enemy.
“These two wounds [on the body] are also likely to have been inflicted after the armor had been removed from the body,” said Dr. Appleby. “Examples of such ‘humiliation injuries’ are well known from the historical and forensic literature, and historical sources have suggested Richard’s body was mistreated.”
King Richard’s Ignoble Burial
From the evidence of his grave, it appears that Richard III was buried unclothed, without a shroud or coffin. He was lowered into a hurriedly dug pit feet first. The burial was not long enough to contain him so his upper body had to be bent to fit and his head was slightly elevated. The King’s hands were not placed on either side of his body as is usual in medieval burials, but with the right crossed over the left. Despite no evidence of rope, this suggests that his hands were tied at the time of burial.
Putting Richard III to Rest
In early 2014, the body of Richard III will, in the words of Philipa Langley of the Richard III Society, lie at last in a “lasting and dignified sanctuary” in Leicester cathedral. But the Greyfriar’s skeleton, a mystery for so long, calls much of what has been written about the king into question. Far from being a small hunchback, he was tall and graceful. Could it be that his character has been similarly misrepresented?
