"Good frend, for Iesus sake forebeare To digge the dust encloased heare. Bleste be ye man spares these stones, And curste be he moves my bones."
This is William Shakespeare's epitaph, dating back to 1616. Though the world's best- known dramatist, Shakespeare was not being dramatic when he wrote these words. Instead, he was trying to prevent something unsavory that neither his fame nor fortune could deter: his corpse being dug up by grave robbers.
His curse may not have worked, at least not centuries ago: According to a documentary that aired over the weekend, "A radar scan of William Shakespeare's tomb has discovered signs of tampering with his final resting place that lend credence to a story about his skull being stolen in the 18th century, researchers say."
Shakespeare's Curse-Protected Grave Gets Radar Scan
The archaeologists cleverly avoided Shakespeare's curse, which specifically warns against "digging dust" and "moving bones" but says nothing about using ground-penetrating radar. The findings, though indirect, give new life to speculation-long dismissed as rumor-that his head may have been stolen in 1794.
But why would anyone want to steal Shakespeare's head?
As "The New York Times" noted, one motivation for stealing his skull can be found in phrenology, a wildly popular-and widely believed-pseudoscientific field of "study" begun in the late 1700s in which a person's skull was believed to reveal his or her personality and other characteristics.
A prominent bump on the forehead, for example, might be assumed to reflect a proficiency in language or dramatics. It's not surprising that the skull of one of the most famous and important literary figures in history would be coveted and examined.
Skull-Duggery and Grave Robbing Aside from phrenological curiosity about Shakespeare's skull specifically, there were other reasons why the bard's bones might have been disturbed. Throughout most of history, medical knowledge of anatomy was poor and indirect, partly because of fear and taboos against cutting open corpses.
Shakespeare Portraits Reveal Bard at Different Ages: Photos
The Renaissance brought an emphasis on practical, real-world knowledge about anatomy, which necessarily meant examining and cutting up the dead. In Europe, the rise of early medical centers created a strong demand for dead bodies; a few cadavers were made available by royal decree, usually the bodies of condemned criminals. In the 1700s, in fact, dissection was a punishment for serious crimes. Demand soon outstripped supply, however, and a black market for cadavers emerged.
Centuries ago it was not uncommon to wear dead strangers' body parts; in the 1600s and 1700s teeth and hair from dead bodies was sometimes used to make dentures and wigs, respectively (if not respectfully).
By 1720, theft from graveyards was common in London, and grave robbers (or "resurrection men," as they were known) were making a profit digging up bodies and selling them to anatomists and doctors. Some were so eager to cash in that they didn't wait for people to die: Irish grave robbers Brendan Burke and William Hare, for example, committed 16 murders and sold the bodies to a well-known London anatomist in 1828.
Shakespeare's Original Audiences: Photos
By the 1900s most grave robbing in the West had ceased, though it continues into modern times, for different reasons. In 2012, for example, over 100 graves were dug up in the African country of Benin, looted by grave robbers seeking body parts for use in voodoo rituals.
So did thieves really make (as Shakespeare wrote in "King Richard III") "Off with his head"? Measure for measure, some aren't convinced by the new analysis and Stratford-upon-Avon church has made it clear that more direct investigation (i.e., digging up the bard's grave) is quite out of the question.
Wherever his skull may actually be, Shakespeare was not alone in his concerns about post-mortem theft. In fact a giant named O'Brien-who stood over seven feet tall and was exhibited in 1780s London-feared that his skeleton would be seized and displayed after his death. He was correct.