Recently, the remains of King Richard III were discovered beneath a Leicester parking lot in the midlands of England. Although the King only ruled for two years (between 1483 and 1485), he has sparked much interest by the public as there lies mystery around his burial. He was the last English King to die in battle, bringing the Plantagenet dynasty to an end. Richard was killed at Bosworth Field in Leicestershire after facing Henry Tudor, who then became the ruling King. Richard’s body was brought back to Leicester and publicly exhibited before being given to Franciscan friars to be buried. At that time, however, there was the dissolution of the monasteries and the friary disappeared, leading to the mystery of what actually happened to the King’s body. Throughout the years there has been much speculation over where his remains lie. In February 2013, the University of Leichester announced that they identified the remains that they found in Greyfriars as King Richard III.
The methods that were used in the identification process of the King are what interested me the most. The archaeological methods mapping, survey and the use of ground-penetrating radar that are used in many discoveries were used to look at several features of the city’s once Greyfriars friary, where a skeleton was found buried beneath the ground’s surface. DNA analysis was used to properly identify the body found as that of the King. As a science geek, seeing the methods used in identifying him thoroughly captivated my interest. Dr. Turi King from the University of Leichester used DNA sequencing techniques to match the skeleton’s DNA with two known relatives of King Richard III from his maternal line. After being cleaned and treated with UV light, one of his excavated teeth was used for the extraction of DNA. Mitochondrial DNA was used instead of nuclear DNA as there are numerous mitochondria per cell compared to only one nucleus, so more DNA could be recovered to work with. However, mitochondrial DNA is inherited maternally, so comparison studies of his DNA could only be done to direct relatives on his maternal line. The DNA was amplified using Polymerase Chain Reaction, a process in which millions of copies of a sequence of DNA are generated. The amplified DNA was then sequenced using the Sanger method, which was then compared to the DNA of the King’s living relatives (from his maternal side). The results from the DNA analysis upholds the archaeological findings that the remains found do indeed belong to King Richard III.
The combination of common laboratory processes and archaeological methods that were used in this discovery fascinates me. As I have done performed these procedures in lab classes, it is interesting to see the significance of their uses in real time action. It is comical to think that the same processes that I used to identify a bacterium are the ones used in identifying a royal King! This just goes to show that archaeology is a very interdisciplinary field and that a variety of techniques from multiple areas of expertise are needed to lead to such great discoveries.
Sources:
https://www.le.ac.uk/richardiii/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/03/world/europe/richard-iii-search-announcement/
I have also recently heard about this discovery of King Richard III’s remains being discovered in England. I came across the story while I was on this app called Digg which posts popular news stories from around the world in one site. I was scrolling on saw something about a king’s body being found and something is surely wrong with you if you can scroll past that without going to see what it’s all about. The article was similar to the one that you have read(could have very well been the same exact article that you read) and it talks about how and where they found the remains and everything that followed the discovery. I find the methods they used to locate the remains and to confirm that it was, in fact, King Richard III very fascinating because I am science geek/science major as well. I didn’t know that mitochondria is inherited maternally but I now know that from reading this blog post. The in’s and out’s of DNA are so complex and specific in some areas and general and random in others. It’s crazy how biology works like that. It’s flabbergasting that we can look at some mitochondrial DNA on a tooth of a old skeleton found under a parking lot and by cross-referencing it with some supposed DNA from direct relatives of King Richards mother’s side and discover that the skeleton is, in fact, a skeleton of a king. Science is a wonderful thing and has applications in all professions.