King Richard III's Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

The case is officially closed on what's being called the oldest forensic investigation in history. A new genetic analysis is providing incontrovertible evidence that the skeleton found under a parking lot in Leicester belonged to the king, while uncovering new truths about his appearance and lineage.

Advertisement

Richard III was the last king of England to die in battle. His remains were discovered in 2012 under a parking lot by archaeologists from the University of Leicester. Early last year, scientists used a DNA analysis to link a Canadian family to the remains, offering compelling evidence that it remains belonged to the king. But the new analysis by an international research team led by Turi King considered a deeper pool of evidence.

Advertisement

Confirmation of the Maternal Line

The researchers collected DNA from living relatives of Richard III and analyzed several genetic markers, including the complete mitochondrial genomes (which are inherited through the maternal line), and Y-chromosomal markers (which are inherited from the paternal line), from both the skeletal remains and the living relatives. The researchers also carried a statistical analysis, which hadn't been done before.

Advertisement
Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

Even at their most conservative, the researchers say the remains have been confirmed to 99.999% accuracy. Analysis of the mitochondrial DNA shows a match between RIII and his contemporary female-line relatives, Michael Ibsen and Wendy Duldig.

Advertisement
Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

The Y-chromosomal markers differ, which is not surprising. The chances for a false-paternity event is fairly high after so many generations. Richard III's male line appears to be broken at one or more points between himself and living male-line relatives descended from Henry Somerset, the 5th Duke of Beaufort.

Advertisement
Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

Blond With Blue Eyes

Remarkably, the new analysis also sheds some light on RIII's appearance. Genetic markers suggest that he probably had blond hair and that he most definitely had blue eyes.

Advertisement
Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

Hair and eye color prediction from genetic data.

Thus, his depiction in the portrait that resides in the Society of Antiquaries in London is the most accurate we have of him.

Advertisement
Illustration for article titled King Richard IIIs Remains Have Been Confirmed To 99.999% Accuracy

Leicester University has put together a wonderful video package where they explain their methodologies and findings in great detail.

Advertisement

Richard III - The DNA Analysis & Conclusion:

Richard III and the Break in the Male Line:

Richard III - Hair and Eye Color:

Is the Skeleton Found in Leicester Richard III?:

The Arched Framed Portrait of Richard III - Society of Antiquaries of London:

Read the entire study at Nature Communications: "Identification of the remains of King Richard III."

Advertisement

Images: University of Leicester.

Follow George on Twitter and friend him on Facebook.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

gigglesticks
gigglesticks

The chances for a false-paternity event is fairly high after so many generations

Oh, is that what the kids are calling it these days? Female line: the only safe and sound way to determine ancestry, at least until recent egg-borrowing scenarios.

Maybe someone here can help me out. A decade or two ago, there was a study at a hospital that tested (unethically, and probably illegally) the DNA of men whose name appeared on the birth certificates, and compared it to the DNA of their supposed children.

It's been a long time, but I think they determined that 10% of the men could not have father of the child. Now maybe they did know they were not the father (perhaps a lot of artificial insemination at this hospital), but maybe they didn't. Anyone know the study I mean?