King Richard III has been dead for more than 500 years, but his bones continue to ignite fresh controversy.
The medieval king, unearthed from a Leicester parking lot in 2012, has been the center of debate over where and how his body should be reburied. Now, a plan to sequence the full genome of Richard III has brought new strife.
"Why is the University of Leicester doing this, and why is it doing it without any consultation?" said John Ashdown-Hill, an independent historian involved with the search for the bones. The DNA testing will add very little to scientific knowledge, and it breaks agreements with Buckingham Palace made before the university got involved in the Richard III search, Ashdown-Hill told LiveScience. [See Photos of the Search of King Richard III]
"We're talking about a member of the royal family and a former head of state," he said.
A lost king — and controversy
Richard III died in 1485, a victim on the field at the Battle of Bosworth in the English War of the Roses. Historical records held that his battered body was taken to Leicester and buried, but the grave was lost in the early 1600s.
The search for Richard III's body was sparked by the Richard III Society, a group of historical enthusiasts who call themselves Richardians. Ashdown-Hill is part of the "Looking for Richard" team that got the ball rolling. In 2003, he started working to sequence the mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down the maternal line, of Richard III's living descendant.
Richard III found … in a parking lotFeb. 5, 201302:13
Screenwriter and dedicated Richardian Philippa Langley took the lead on the archaeology, urging the Leicester City Council to allow a dig in its building's parking lot, as historical records suggested that the lot sat over the site of Greyfriars, the church where Richard III was buried. The Richard III Society funded the dig and hired University of Leicester Archaeological Services (ULAS) to do the archaeology. ULAS is an independent group of archaeologists embedded in the University of Leicester's school of archaeology and ancient history.
These players have sometimes clashed with each other as well as with outsiders. Most prominent are debates over where the king will be reburied. The University of Leicester was granted the exhumation license for the body, making it the institution responsible for the reburial. The plan is to rebury Richard III in Leicester Cathedral. That arrangement has sparked anger from some who claim relation to the king and would like to see him buried in his adopted hometown of York. Even some who accept a Leicester burial are upset with the modernistic designs for Richard III's tomb.
As a result of the burial controversy, the University of Leicester's custody of the body is undergoing judicial review, with a judgment expected in a few weeks. Against this backdrop come the criticisms of a newly announced project to sequence the entire genome of Richard III. The identification of the king's body was made with mitochondrial DNA, which is a limited portion of the body's DNA.
That mitochondrial DNA test was necessary, as Richard III was buried in a shallow grave without a coffin or remaining marker, Ashdown-Hill said. But he argued that further testing would go against precedent.
"Her Majesty the Queen would not allow exhumation of other royal remains, or the testing of them," Ashdown-Hill said. The hurried circumstances of Richard III's burial and the turmoil at the time are the only reasons his bones don't lie in state like other monarchs, he said — in which case, they would never be studied. [Images: A New Dig at Richard III's Grave]
The only other royal body exhumed was Anne de Mowbray, the 8-year-old Duchess of York. She was the child bride of one of Richard III's nephews, one of the two "Princes in the Tower" who were kept in the Tower of London and then vanished when Richard took the throne. (Rumors persist that Richard had them murdered.) The little duchess was found accidentally in 1964 on a construction site; her body was not scientifically investigated, and she was reburied in Westminster Abbey in 1965.
"It's breaking the precedent we had in 1965, what's going on at the moment [with Richard III]," Ashdown-Hill said.
The controversy also reflects distrust between the University of Leicester and some on the search team not affiliated with the university. The "Looking for Richard" team instigated the project and fought an uphill battle to get everyone else on board for the actual investigation, Ashdown-Hill said.
"We had to work really hard to get them to do it, and yet when they found it, everything was, 'The University of Leicester has done this, the University of Leicester has done that,'" he said.
The "Looking for Richard" team talked with Buckingham Palace before the University of Leicester got involved and agreed that images of any remains found shouldn't be broadcast and that the remains should be treated with respect, Ashdown-Hill said. The university now claims the right to continue the scientific investigation, and has already taken additional bone samples. Even if the court rules that the university doesn't have legal custody of the body, researchers may still continue the DNA analysis, Ashdown-Hill said.
"This might tell us whether or not Richard III had difficulty in digesting milk, for example," he said. "It might tell us whether his hair was medium brown, light brown or dark brown. But is that really very valuable information?"
Turi King, the University of Leicester geneticist leading the DNA project, did not respond to a request for comment; instead, the university sent a statement defending the decision. The study was considered by the ethics committee of the university and the university's college of medicine before approval and is governed by guidelines set by the Church of England and the governmental body English Heritage, according to the university.
"King Richard III is a figure of immense historical and cultural significance, and the information that we hope to obtain from sequencing his genome will provide insights into the health and ancestry of the king and his historical environment," the university statement reads.
Follow Stephanie Pappas on Twitter and Google+. Follow LiveScience on Twitter, Facebook and Google+. Original article on LiveScience.