Is Leicester really a fitting resting place for Richard III?
Kapellmeister
Posts: 41,322 Forum Member
✭
I think not.
It seems really unfortunate that the excavation licence granted by the government gave Leicester council and the university the right to decide what happpened to any burials they discovered.
Richard III had no connection with Leicester other than staying there prior to Bosworth and his body returning there after the battle. Surely a more suitable location would be York Minster? Sadly, like medieval monks before them, the people of Leicester, the councillors and the mayor especially, see nothing but tourist money filling their coffers. After all, there is no reason at the moment for anyone to visit Leicester as it's a complete dump, it's once historical townscape shredded by 20th century redevelopment.
The city didn't even have a cathedral until 1927. Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England, will now be buried in a glorified parish church, most of which was rebuilt by the Victorians. York Minster, or Westminster Abbey, are obviously more fitting locations, but no. The greedy councillors of Leicester will force a reburial in their 'city'. A final insult, especially as it seems likely that the majority of the population of Leicester wouldn't have a clue about the Wars of the Roses or have any interest in Engish history.
York Minster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York_Minster
Leicester Cathedral:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leicester_Cathedral
It seems really unfortunate that the excavation licence granted by the government gave Leicester council and the university the right to decide what happpened to any burials they discovered.
Richard III had no connection with Leicester other than staying there prior to Bosworth and his body returning there after the battle. Surely a more suitable location would be York Minster? Sadly, like medieval monks before them, the people of Leicester, the councillors and the mayor especially, see nothing but tourist money filling their coffers. After all, there is no reason at the moment for anyone to visit Leicester as it's a complete dump, it's once historical townscape shredded by 20th century redevelopment.
The city didn't even have a cathedral until 1927. Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England, will now be buried in a glorified parish church, most of which was rebuilt by the Victorians. York Minster, or Westminster Abbey, are obviously more fitting locations, but no. The greedy councillors of Leicester will force a reburial in their 'city'. A final insult, especially as it seems likely that the majority of the population of Leicester wouldn't have a clue about the Wars of the Roses or have any interest in Engish history.
York Minster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/York_Minster
Leicester Cathedral:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leicester_Cathedral
0
Comments
Fair enough, but can't you see that it's inappropriate? I have no affiliation with York, London or Leicester but Leicester is clearly the least suitable location, true?
I disagree. In fact I think the insistence of burying him there reflects badly on Leicester. It just makes you look greedy.
He was King of England & so belongs to the nation, not the place where he was buried in haste. He should be re-interred in a manner & location befitting a monarch.
Westminster Abbey would, imo, be the most suitable location.
I agree. The Leicester mayor particularly, Peter Soulsby, has emerged as a figure clearly only interested in the financial implications of the discovery.
Nearly all the great medieval and Tudor kings and queens have been buried in either secular/monastic cathedrals or great abbey churches. Leicester's pitiful 'cathedral' is neither. To force a burial there is quite disgraceful.
Gary Lineker? Showaddywaddy? Englebert Humperdinck? Developing the DNA fingerprint at the university?
Struck me as rather strange that programme last night with the Richard III Society woman weeping and wailing and all that stuff with the standard over his cardboard box, etc etc and yet she didn't insist his will was carried out? And all that talk about respecting his remains but why bother if they are then going to disrespect his body by putting it in the very city where his body was attacked? TBH Leicester Cathedral is probably about as attractive as a municipal car-park so they might as well have left him there. I have been to Leicester countless times and can't even remember the 'cathedral'.:D York Minster is the most spectacular building in the UK, and the place he asked to be put. He'd be better left in the cardboard box, than buried amongst the people who hated him.
Yes I was having this discussion with my brother in law yesterday. He said
should we be burying a devouted catholic in a 19th century protestant church in a provincial backwater? especially given that the new faith was steam-rollered in by the son of the man that usurped his throne so he could try and produce a male heir?
And my reply was
I'm not convinced he cares that much. One religious dude being much like another religious dude I guess. Plus. You know. dead and all.
Ooh I hope it is up to me
- Westminster Abbey where his wife is buried.
- York Minster where he said in his will that he wanted to be buried / as he is from the House of York.
- St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle where Royalty at that time were normally buried.
- Leicester Cathedral because he was killed nearby / originally buried locally in haste.
Michael Ibsen.
Who's he? Anyone well known?
If he has got descendants who says bring him back from Leicestershire, then yes, go ahead and do that.
They guy they took the DNA from.
Simon and Garfunkel performed at the de Montfort Hall many years ago.
On a serious note (and as a Lancastrian when we had proper counties) York would seem the most appropriate place and offer the greatest respect.
It seems grossly inappropriate for one of England's most famous, controversial and fascinating monarchs to be buried in stinking Leicester!!!
The government should step in and order Leicester to give up the remains for reburial in a suitable location i.e. Westminster Abbey or York Minster. A medieval king should be buried in a fitting location, not squirreled away in a mediocre Victorian parish church with no historical connections to the king. Even Middleham parish church would be preferable! It would be nice if, for once, the right thing could be done.
People are not uncommonly buried in the place where they die. Cardinal Wolsey, Archbishop of York, is also buried in Leicester. He has been in Leicester for over five hundred years already, it seems fitting that he stays.