Genealogy and DNA were vital to proving the identity of Richard III when the lost King’s skeleton was rediscovered under the remains of the Greyfriars Priory in Leicester in September 2012. Scientists from the University extracted Mitochondrial DNA from the bones and matched it to the DNA of a modern descendant of Richard III’s sister, Michael Ibsen. The process was a mixture of science and historical detective work.
So what was the role played by DNA analysis in unlocking the secret of Richard’s identity from his bones? And just how conclusive is such evidence when attempting to establish genealogical links between ancestors and their descendants?
Greyfriars DNA Analysis
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, transmits genetic information from an individual to their children. Consisting of a unique four-letter code, the DNA sequence in the human genome contains all the information required to create a person. But the more often the sequence is replicated, the more ‘mistakes,’ or variance, occur. It is the frequency of these mistakes that determines how closely related people are. The less variation there is in the codes of two people, the more closely related they are.
DNA was extracted from the teeth and long bones of the Greyfriars skeleton by a small team of five geneticists led by Dr. Turi King of Leicester University. “I am doing all the modern work,” said Dr. King in an interview with the author. “In one lab I’ll be doing the DNA (ancient DNA) work with guidance, and in the other lab I’m taking the sample and staying while someone processes it independently. In total there will be five people and, if I need to do further sequencing, then one other person involved.”
DNA is easily contaminated, and even breathing is hazardous to a sample. Dr. King and the excavation team took precautions against this. “Both Jo [Dr. Jo Appleby] (who did the bulk of the excavation) and I were wearing the full gear (suits, face-masks, double gloves, sterilized tools, etc.) to minimize chances of that happening,” explained Dr. King. “Also, I’ve collected samples from everyone who was on the dig team and have sequenced their mtDNA as a precaution so that I can spot any contamination.”
Why Mitochondrial DNA?
Most DNA is found in the cell nucleus. But a small amount is also found in the mitochondria of the cell. It is this DNA that is being used to identify the bones at Greyfriars. Dr. King explained why mtDNA was used despite its small quantities: “This is the DNA of choice for two reasons. The first of these is that, after death, the usual mechanisms which keep our DNA molecules long and healthy when we’re alive are no longer working and our DNA begins to break down. While there is only one copy of our genomic DNA in each of our cells, there are many, many copies of our mitochondrial DNA; so if anything is going to be left, it will be mtDNA.”
“The other reason that mitochondrial DNA is so useful in this case is that it’s passed down the female line, from mothers to children (but only daughters pass it on),” said Dr. King. This factor was particularly important in the case of the Greyfriars skeleton. Without a comparative source of DNA from a modern relative of Richard III, it is unlikely that the search for the king would ever have got underway.
The Role of Genealogy
All of Richard III’s male relatives were killed after his defeat, but his sisters survived. Dr. John Ashdown-Hill traced a modern descendant of Richard’s eldest sister Anne as part of another project. “In 2003 I attended a conference at Mechelen in Belgium marking the 500th anniversary of the death of Richard’s sister, Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy. Margaret was buried at the Greyfriars church in Mechelen, but her gravesite had been lost in the religious wars of the 16th century,” explained Dr. Ashdown-Hill in an interview with the author. “Three sets of female bones of about the right age had been found, and Belgian colleagues asked me how they could clarify which (if any) of these bones were Margaret’s. I said DNA – so they asked me to provide a sequence.”
To find a match, Dr. Ashdown- Hill began to trace descendants of Margaret and her female relatives. He had no idea if any of the lines of descent survived. “Women have the major problem that they changed their names when they married,” said Dr. Ashdown-Hill. “Eventually I traced one line to Joy Ibsen in Canada, and I contacted her, and she gave a DNA sample.” Joy’s son, Michael Ibsen provided the mtDNA for the search for Richard III.
Anthropology and The Limitations of DNA
Despite having a source of DNA from the body, and a corresponding source from a descendant, there was no guarantee that the experts would be able to use the DNA evidence to obtain a conclusive ID of the Greyfriars skeleton. The mtDNA of Michael Ibsen could have mutated so significantly over the 17 generations between him and his great-great aunt that comparison was impossible. The amount of DNA that survived was critical. “Different bits [of DNA] have different mutation rates,” explained Dr. King. “The accuracy of the method will be contingent on how much DNA we can retrieve – the longer the sequence, the more accurate we can be.”
As it turned out, the DNA was a match. However, it was not the only evidence that experts used to conclude that the Greyfriars skeleton was indeed Richard III.
