A ROYAL PAIN FOR U.K.
Skulduggery in bloodlines
When the skeleton of Richard III was discovered in a parking lot in Leicester in 2012, archeologists knew it was a momentous find.
But little did they realize that it might expose other skeletons — those in the cupboard of the British aristocracy, and even call into question the blood line of the Royal family.
In order to prove that the bones really were Richard III’s, 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’s. However, when they checked the male line they discovered something odd. The DNA did not match, meaning 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 such as Henry VI, Henry VII and Henry VIII had royal blood, and, therefore, the right to rule.
And it has implications for the current Royal family, which shares a direct blood line 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 greatgreat-grandfather. Fathers pass on a copy of their Y chromosome to their sons, so Richard and Edward should carry the same DNA. Likewise, any descendant of Edward’s would share the same Y chromosome as Richard, and a match would prove his descent.
Scientists were intrigued to find that the DNA did not match, suggesting that a “non-paternity event” occurred 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 (13401399) or John’s son Henry IV (1366-1413) the royal blood line would be lost.
Elizabeth Norton, a Tudor historian and author, 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,” she said.
“This might suggest that she did not have a royal blood line and, if so, then the Tudors did not, either.”
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.