Richard III DNA reveals marital infidelity

Richard III's skeleton was discovered underneath a car park in Leicester. Photo / AP

Infidelity revealed by Richard III's DNA puts Tudor lineage in doubt

Scientists studying the DNA of Richard III, the last Plantagenet King, whose body was found buried beneath a Leicester car park, have revealed that there was marital infidelity among his aristocratic relatives.

Paternity tests on the DNA of a living male-line descendent of Richard III's royal lineage have failed to find a match, which points to at least one royal being born on the wrong side of the bed sheets, the researchers revealed.

The latest research into the DNA extracted from the 15th century skeleton shows unequivocally that the remains belong to Richard III, who died in the battle of Bosworth in 1485, said Turi King of Leicester University, the lead author of the study published in Nature Communications.

"Even with our highly conservative analysis, the evidence is overwhelming that these are the remains of King Richard III, thereby closing an over 500-year-old missing person's case," said Dr King.

Mitochondrial DNA extracted from the skeleton, which is passed on exclusively through the maternal line, matches precisely with two female-line descendants alive today, who are both 14th cousins twice removed from Richard III, said Dr King.

These findings, combined with other circumstantial evidence, give a probability of the skeleton belonging to Richard as 99.9994 per cent, according to the scientists.

However, DNA analysis carried out on the Y chromosome of Richard did not match a living descendent of Henry, fifth Duke of Beaufort, who was supposed to be related to Richard through the male line.

"Although the genealogy says they are male-line related, the DNA is telling us that there has been a non-paternity or break in that Y-chromosome chain," she said.

This suggests that the male-line lineage descended from Richard's great-great grandfather, Edward III, was broken at some point, calling into question various claims to the throne - including that of the Tudors, said Kevin Shurer, professor of local history at Leicester University.

"The fact that we have a break means just that: we have a break. It doesn't mean the skeleton isn't Richard because what we have is the very strong evidence triangulated with two living-day relatives with the mitochondrial DNA," Professor Shurer said.

"The break however does raise other questions, more of a historical nature," he said.

It is not unusual to find that the male-line is broken in DNA cases looking back over several generations. Scientists estimate that the rate of non-paternity is about 2 per cent.

"Depending on which link in the chain is broken, and of course there is the possibility that there could be more than one break, this asks questions about the Plantagenets and the claims to the throne of both the Houses of York and Lancaster," Professor Shurer said.

"The critical [link in the chain] is between Edward III and his son John of Gaunt. If the break occurs here then this asks questions about the legitimacy of John's son Henry IV and his subsequent heirs, Henry V and Henry VI," he said.

- The Independent