Shakespeare's Skull May Be Missing

[jason_c]

On the box last night (UK) was a documentary hosted by historian Dr Helen Castor in which she examined (with a highly critical eye, IMHO) the ultrasound investigation of the Bard's grave. What came out of all this was the fact that US cannot actually detect bones - what it can and did detect were "air pockets" formed by the earth filling settling as a body decomposes, producing voids. There was, or so I understand, no detectable air-pocket where the corpse's head would have been positioned. So there does seem to be good reason to believe that a body was actually buried in this particular grave, and also some reason to think that the skull is missing.

The prog then went on to examine a story published in The Argosy magazine around the year 1880 that the Bard's bonce had been stolen in 1795 by a certain Dr Frank Chambers who, ostensibly, required it for reasons of 'phrenology'. The team certainly found evidence that the grave had been 'repaired' at some point in the past, suggesting that it may well have been opened. There is a legend that after Dr Chambers had done his measurements or whatever he re-buried the skull in a charnel-house under the parish church of Beoley, near to Stratford-on-Avon. The ultra-sound team went there, and opened the charnel-house to find that it contained 4 skeletons complete with skulls and one skull with no accompanying skeleton. Full of hope, they laser-scanned this skull in situ (as they had been forbidden to move it, let alone take it away). A prominent specialist in facial reproduction (can't remember her name, but she was involved in 're-creating' Richard III's face from his skull) subsequently pronounced that the Beoley skull is that of a woman who died in her early 70's.

So the mystery is still yet to be solved (and probably never will be until the church of Holy Trinity in Stratford give permission for the grave to be physically excavated...which they never will, pointing to the well-known curse!)

Graham

The documentary has obviously been sexed up. I have seen most of the programme but the final segment I have still to watch. As I thought the technology cannot pick up bone. I believe I have read somewhere that the original stone has been changed, but im unsure if im misremembering this. What I certainly remember reading is that repair work of sort were carried out. The source of this is the writer Washington Irving and his conversation with the sexton of the church:

https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/i/irv.../stratfor.html

"A few years since also, as some laborers were digging to make an adjoining vault, the earth caved in, so as to leave a vacant space almost like an arch, through which one might have reached into his grave. No one, however, presumed to meddle with his remains so awfully guarded by a malediction; and lest any of the idle or the curious, or any collector of relics, should be tempted to commit depredations, the old sexton kept watch over the place for two days, until the vault was finished and the aperture closed again. He told me that he had made bold to look in at the hole, but could see neither coffin nor bones; nothing but dust. It was something, I thought, to have seen the dust of Shakspeare."

The entire account of Irving's travel to Stratford is worth reading.

The programme has(from the segments I have watched) not mentioned this frankly disappointing claim that the grave is now empty. Instead, they concentrate on some murky titillating gothic tale of graverobbing.

[Graham]

Oh yes - nearly forgot. The scientists on last night's prog said that the bodies of the Bard and his relatives were buried in shrouds, not coffins. Which, er, would explain the absence of any remains of coffins in the grave.

I think Washington Irving's report of his visit to the church is right on the button.

Of course, this begs the question: if Shakespeare's mortal remains aren't in that particular grave, then where are they? Elsewhere in Holy Trinity church, or somewhere else altogether? As the parish register clearly records the burial of one Wm Shakespeare, Gent, in Holy Trinity church, then I would say he's in there somewhere.....

Graham

[jason_c]

Oh yes - nearly forgot. The scientists on last night's prog said that the bodies of the Bard and his relatives were buried in shrouds, not coffins. Which, er, would explain the absence of any remains of coffins in the grave.

I think Washington Irving's report of his visit to the church is right on the button.

Of course, this begs the question: if Shakespeare's mortal remains aren't in that particular grave, then where are they? Elsewhere in Holy Trinity church, or somewhere else altogether? As the parish register clearly records the burial of one Wm Shakespeare, Gent, in Holy Trinity church, then I would say he's in there somewhere.....

Graham

If the account is true the bones have most likely disintegrated, or moved. The area floods regularly. This leads to disintegration of bones or the earth moving. Of course disintegrating bones is a far less exciting story than a tale of graverobbing.

Edit: that Shakespeare was not buried in a coffin helps reaffirm the tale from the old sexton in Washington Irving's tale; that the grave is entirely empty. Why wasn't the Irving tale mentioned in last nights show?