Richard III's DNA

[seemslikeadream]

Richard III DNA shows British Royal family may not have royal bloodline
The University of Leicester has studied the DNA of Richard III and found that there could be a break in the royal bloodline


Sarah Knapton By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor. Graphic by Sam Dodge4:00PM GMT 02 Dec 2014
When the body of Richard III was discovered in a car park in Leicester in 2012 archaeologists knew it was a momentous find.
But little did they realise that it might expose the skeletons in the cupboard of the British aristocracy, and even call into question the bloodline of the Royal family.
In order to prove that the skeleton really was Richard III, scientists needed to take a DNA sample and match it to his descendants.
Genetic testing through his maternal DNA proved conclusively that the body was the King. However, when they checked the male line they discovered something odd. The DNA did not match showing that at some point in history an adulterous affair had broken the paternal chain.
Although it is impossible to say when the affair happened, if it occurred around the time of Edward III (1312- 1377) it could call into question whether kings like Henry VI, Henry VII and Henry VIII had royal blood, and therefore the right to rule.
Related Articles
Richard III graphic: royal family tree 03 Dec 2014
How Richard III was discovered 04 Feb 2013
Richard III: skeleton is the king 04 Feb 2013
Richard III to be re-interred 04 Feb 2013
Without his claim to royalty, Henry VII is unlikely to have been able to raise an army for the Battle of Bosworth Field, in which Richard III was killed, and the history of England could have been very different.
And it has implications for our own Royal Family who also share a direct bloodline to the Tudors.
Kevin Schurer, Professor of English Local History, at the University of Leicester said: “The first thing we need to get out of the way is that we are not indicating that Her Majesty should not be on the throne.
“There are 19 links where the chain could have been broken so it is statistically more probable that it happened at a time where it didn’t matter. However there are parts of the chain which if broken could hypothetically affect royalty.”
Because Richard III was childless, scientists looked at the descendants of Edward III, his great great grandfather.
Genetically, fathers pass on a copy of their Y chromosome to their sons, so Richard and Edward should carry the same DNA. Likewise, any descendent of Edward’s would share the same Y chromosome as Richard, and a match would prove his royal descent.
However scientists were intrigued to find that the DNA did not match, suggesting a ‘non-paternity event’ somewhere between Edward III and his descendants. In other words, someone was unknowingly illegitimate.
If the illegitimate baby was Edward’s son John of Gaunt (1340 - 1399) or his son Henry IV (1366 - 1413) then the royal blood line would be lost.
Prof Schurer added: “If there is one particular link that has more significance than any other it has to be the link between Edward III and his son John of Gaunt.
“John of Gaunt was the father of Henry IV, so if John of Gaunt was not actually the child of Edward III, arguably Henry IV had no legitimate right to the throne and therefore neither did Henry V, Henry VI and indirectly, the Tudors.
“Likewise if the break is in the part of Richard III this would also ask questions about legitimacy of the claims of Richard and his brother Edward.
“However you are never going to get an answer without exhuming a dead person.”

Henry VII (1457 – 1509) claimed a right to the throne through his wife Elizabeth of York, who was the daughter of Edward IV (1422 - 1483). Her royal line also came through Edward III, via Edmund, Duke of York, the brother of John of Gaunt.
Henry also had a royal bloodline through Margaret Beaufort, his mother, who was the great great great great granddaughter of Edward I (1239 - 1307), but the Beauforts were banned by statute from ruling by Henry IV.
Tudor historian and author Elizabeth Norton said the research could have wide implications for British history.
“This is a very interesting finding. There are huge arguments about whether Elizabeth of York was legitimate,” said Ms Norton, “This might suggest that she did not have a royal blood line and if so then the Tudors did not either.”
However she believes that the break is unlike to have happened with John of Gaunt.
“John of Gaunt and his wife are really a love story,” she said, “He married her and legitimised the children he had with her. So it’s unlikely that the link was broken there.”
The DNA results also revealed new details about the appearance of Richard III. It proves he is likely to have had blue eyes and blond hair, which may have darkened over time.
Experts say a portrait of Richard which hangs in the Society of Antiquities in London is the closest representation of the former King.

The portrait of Richard from The Society of Antiquities
Dr Turi King, of the department of genetics at the University of Leicester added: “There are no contemporary portraits of Richard. They all post-date his death by about 25-30 years onwards.
“So what I was interested in doing was looking at what the DNA evidence could tell us about what his hard an eye colour was predicted to be and see which portrait that most closely matches.
“The DNA evidence indicates that he has a high probability of having blue eye colour and blond hair. That would be a childhood hair colour, and hair can darken with age.”
Dr King is currently attempting to sequence the entire genome of Richard III to look for diseases and health issues that the King might have suffered.
The Royal Household said it did not wish to comment on the research, whihc is published in the journal Nature Communications and funded by the Wellcome Trust.

Richard III's DNA throws up infidelity surprise
By Paul Rincon
Science editor, BBC News website

Richard III portrait and skull

Analysis of DNA from Richard III has thrown up a surprise: evidence of infidelity in his family tree.

Scientists who studied genetic material from remains found in a Leicester car park say the finding might have profound historical implications.

Depending on where in the family tree it occurred, it could cast doubt on the Tudor claim to the English throne or, indeed, on Richard's.

The study is published in the journal Nature Communications.

But it remains unknown when the break, or breaks, in the family lineage occurred.

In 2012, scientists extracted genetic material from the remains discovered on the former site of Greyfriars Abbey, where Richard was interred after his death in the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.

'Overwhelming evidence'
Their analysis shows that DNA passed down on the maternal side matches that of living relatives, but genetic information passed down on the male side does not.

We may have solved one historical puzzle, but in so doing, we opened up a whole new one”

Prof Kevin Schurer
University of Leicester
However, given the wealth of other details linking the body to Richard III, the scientists conclude that infidelity is the most likely explanation.

"If you put all the data together, the evidence is overwhelming that these are the remains of Richard III," said Dr Turi King from Leicester University, who led the study.

Speaking at a news briefing at the Wellcome Trust in London, she said that the lack of a match on the male side was not unexpected, because her previous research had shown there was a 1-2% rate of "false paternity" per generation.

The instance of female infidelity, or cuckolding, could have occurred anywhere in the numerous generations that separate Richard III from the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744-1803), whose living descendants provided samples of male-line DNA to be compared against that of the Plantagenet king.

Wendy Duldig and Michael Ibsen
Wendy Duldig and Michael Ibsen are 14th cousins, descended from Richard's eldest sister Anne of York
"We may have solved one historical puzzle, but in so doing, we opened up a whole new one," Prof Kevin Schurer, who was the genealogy specialist on the paper, told BBC News.

Investigation of the male genealogy focused on the Y chromosome, a package of DNA that is passed down from father to son, much like a surname. Most living male heirs of the 5th Duke of Beaufort were found to carry a relatively common Y chromosome type, which is different from the rare lineage found in the car park remains.

Richard III and his royal rival, Henry Tudor (later Henry VII), were both descendants of King Edward III. The infidelity could, in theory, have occurred either on the branch leading back from Henry to Edward or on the branch leading from Richard to Edward.

Henry's ancestor John of Gaunt was plagued by rumours of illegitimacy throughout his life, apparently prompted by the absence of Edward III at his birth. He was reportedly enraged by gossip suggesting he was the son of a Flemish butcher.

"Hypothetically speaking, if John of Gaunt wasn't Edward III's son, it would have meant that (his son) Henry IV had no legitimate claim to the throne, nor Henry V, nor Henry VI," said Prof Schurer.

Turi King
Turi King says there is a greater than 99% probability that the body is that of Richard
Asked whether a break in the branch of the tree leading to the Tudors could have implications for the legitimacy of the present-day royal family, Prof Schurer replied: "Royal succession isn't straightforward inheritance from fathers to sons, and/or daughters. History has taken a series of twists and turns."

The breakage was statistically more likely to have occurred in the part of the family tree which does not affect Royal succession - the most recent stretch - simply because more links in the chain exist there.

The lack of any match for the Y-chromosome lineage is quite curious and suggests an intriguing new avenue for dynastic DNA studies”

Prof Martin Richards
University of Huddersfield
And Dr Anna Whitelock, a reader in early modern history at Royal Holloway - University of London, told BBC News: "It's important to note that Henry VII claimed the throne "by right of conquest" not blood or marriage - his claim was extremely tenuous.

"Henry VII was descended from Edward III from the Beaufort line - the Beauforts were legitimised by half-brother Henry IV but not in succession. Royal succession has been based on many things in the past: ability to lead troops, religion, connections - not always seniority by royal blood."

She added: "The Queen's right to reign in based on the 1701 Act of Settlement that restricted succession to Protestant descendants of Sophia of Hanover. A medieval false paternity does not challenge the current Queen's right to reign."

Blue-eyed and blond
Richard's maternal-line - or mitochondrial - DNA was matched to two living relatives of his eldest sister Anne of York. Michael Ibsen and Wendy Duldig are 14th cousins and both carry the same extremely rare genetic lineage as the body in the car park.

Richard III was defeated in battle by Henry Tudor, marking the end of the Plantagenet dynasty and the beginning of Tudor rule, which lasted until Queen Elizabeth I died childless in 1603.

Richard's battered body was subsequently buried in Greyfriars. As the Leicester team uncovered the male skeleton, the curvature in its spine became obvious. The condition would have caused one of the man's shoulders to be higher than the other, just as a contemporary of Richard described.

Genes involved in hair and eye colour were also tested. The results suggest Richard III had blue eyes, matching one of the earliest known paintings of the king. However, the hair colour analysis gave a 77% probability that the individual was blond, which does not match the depiction.

But the researchers say the test is most closely correlated with childhood hair, and in some blond children, hair darkens during adolescence.

Skeleton 1 in grave
The curvature in the spine of "Skeleton 1", later confirmed as Richard, was obvious during its excavation
The researchers took all the information linking the body to Richard III and carried out a statistical test known as Bayesian analysis to determine the probability that the body was indeed his - or not. Despite the absence of a male-line genetic match, the results came back with a 99.999% probability that the body was that of the Plantagenet king.

Commenting on the study, Prof Martin Richards, a population geneticist at the University of Huddersfield, told BBC News: "The work seems to have been done with great care and looks very convincing to me."

He said Richard III's maternal DNA type was very rare, and carried an additional genetic variant not previously seen before that "seems to be unique amongst a database that includes several thousand Europeans".

"So I agree that their assessment of the match probability is very conservative and it's very likely to be him," Prof Richards said.

He added that, given the apparent certainty of the body's identity, "the lack of any match for the Y-chromosome lineage is quite curious and suggests an intriguing new avenue for dynastic DNA studies".

Dr Ross Barnett, a specialist in ancient DNA at the University of Copenhagen, agreed that the work was "interesting and thorough".

Dr Barnett had previously raised questions over a preliminary analysis of the maternal-line DNA. But he told BBC News: "Now the paper is here and available for scrutiny, I have no further complaints. The team are excellent and I would expect the analysis to be robust."

[Zombie Glenn Beck]

Obviously his skeleton was swapped with a fake so his reptillian DNA wouldnt be analyzed

[semper occultus]

Leicester City's 'good karma': the Buddhist monks behind the Foxes' divine play


The temple’s assistant abbott holds an LCFC banner, which is adorned with sacred patterns

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/30/leicester-citys-good-karma-the-buddhist-monks-behind-the-foxes-d/

From supremely gifted players on the pitch to the tactical vision of the manager and coaching staff and the passionate support of the fans, it takes many people to win English football’s ultimate prize.

But if Leicester City beat Manchester United at Old Trafford to complete their fairy tale story conquest of the Premiership there will be one other, rather more unusual group of supporters to thank – a collection of Buddhist monks from Thailand.


Captain Wes Morgan receives a blessing from a monk before a match

The blessings of the monks, from the Wat Traimit Withayaram Woraviharn (Golden Buddha) Temple, in Bangkok, are being credited with adding a divine element to the team’s play.

About 10 monks from the temple are flown to Britain for most home games by the club’s Thai owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha to bless the players before the kick-off, before spending the match deep in meditation in a specially designated room at Leicester City’s King Power stadium.

Royal effort: wins on the rise after Richard III interred

It’s not just Buddhist chanting that appears to have boosted the Premiership fortunes of Leicester City.

Statisticians noted that the club’s win rate increased dramatically following the interment of the bones of Richard III with full honours at Leicester Cathedral , in March last year.

The King’s remains had been discovered beneath a car park in the city in 2012, and officially declared to be his remains by scientists at Leicester University the following year.


Richard III's coffin passes through Leicester City Centre on a gun carriage in March 2015

Before the discovery of Richard III’s remains Leicester City’s win rate was just 32 per cent.

But between his internment in March 2015 and February this year, the club’s win rate doubled to 63 per cent.

The team’s change in fortunes was none the more evident than during the period immediately following the transfer of King Richard’s bones to the Cathedral, just a mile from the King Power Stadium.

Having drawn two and lost six of their previous eight league games, they then won seven of their final nine games under their then manager Nigel Pearson to avoid relegation.

And the astonishing turnaround in fortunes did not stop there.

On the first day of the 2015/2016 season, Ladbrokes were offering odds of 5000/1 on Leicester to win the Premier League.

That has left a number of lucky punters on the verge of a huge pay out. When their title odds were still 5000/1, Leigh Herbert, 38, a carpenter from Enderby, Leicestershire, placed a bet that they would win the Premiership. He now stands to collect £25,000.

At the start of the season Ladbrokes were offering shorter odds on:

Former Manchester United manager David Moyes becoming an X Factor judge: 2500/1
Arsenal sacking Arsene Wenger and installing Piers Morgan as manager: 2500/1
David Cameron replacing Tim Sherwood as Aston Villa manager: 2500/1
Elvis Presley being found alive and well – 2000/1
Sir Alex Ferguson winning Strictly Come Dancing: 1000/1
Simon Cowell to be next Prime Minister: 500/1