Much of Yorkshire was Lancastrian, and much of Lancashire, Yorkist. I thought everyone knew that.:D Ah so you can murder his father but love the son and that's ok is it?
York city itself loved Richard, and was brave enough to speak out in his defence even as the Tudors came to the throne - potentially very dangerous. And we buried him, possibly even more dangerous.
The city has often had its own political ethos - vide the English Civil War where, at some point, Charles I almost made it the new capital of England - when in many of the towns and villages all round, we were rabid Parliamentarians.:D
In fact, I think York was sending more troops to Richard arriving too late, for Bosworth. Leicester will have meant about as much to Dick 3 as say a motorway service station would to us - just somewhere on the way to somewhere else. He didn't even die there anyway, if you want to stick him where he died - he died at Bosworth. I'd be more than happy with him being at Bosworth actually. He visited Leicester several times so it was hardly a motorway services. In fact his bed was brought to Leicester meaning he would have inteded to stay here had he won the battle. Hardly the actions of a man desperate to get away
He was the last king of the House of York. He married in York. His son is buried not far from York. Richard spent time in York too. (I'm not sure whether he ever spent much - if any - time in Leicester, until he was dead and dumped in his grave, still bound which is one way of keeping him, I guess;)). I'd be more than happy with him being at Bosworth actually. He visited Leicester several times so it was hardly a motorway services. In fact his bed was brought to Leicester meaning he would have inteded to stay here had he won the battle. Hardly the actions of a man desperate to get away
The fact that 500 years on Yorkshire people feel so strongly about this should tell you all you need to know. Rather than an obscene and undignified death-grip on the body for tourist £££s, it would do Leicester more credit to let him go home. Because of course York wouldn't dream of making any money from him would they? I take it it will be entirely free to visit him if he were interred in York?
The man expressed a wish to be buried at York Minster. How hard is it to understand what is the right thing to do? Leicester can keep its little visitor centre, and will always now be associated with Richard III so can milk that with or without a skeleton.:D I still see no written will and testament staing that. Founding chantries is not necessarily a statement of burial intent is it? Leicester's third norman earl was buried in Normandy, his heart somewhere else, yet he founded the college of St Mary De Castro in Leicester as well as owning vast tracts of the Midlands
This was the last king of the House of York. Not Leicester. As you will probably know, York and Lancaster were the names of the houses, not the places they represented. Anyway he was Duke Of Gloucester, should they have him too?
With or without a body - probably with, sadly - you will never get hoards of tourists... you'll only ever get East Midlands school kids forced to go there on school-trips. You do know that, right?I don't know how you seem to think we'll be forcing people to come, it;s up to them if they want to, most school kids never give a toss as long as they're away for the day anyway. I suppose were it York hordes would be merrily dancing to your myriad attractions, so long as they had enough money to get in and were happy to spend the day queueing of course;)
Funny as well how people were so disgusted with the idea of him being in a "parish church" as they put it in Leicester but now York Minster don't want him a parish church in the Yorkshire wilderness would be fine!
Much of Yorkshire was Lancastrian, and much of Lancashire, Yorkist. I thought everyone knew that.:D
York city itself loved Richard, and was brave enough to speak out in his defence even as the Tudors came to the throne - potentially very dangerous.
The city has often had its own political ethos - vide the English Civil War where, at some point, Charles I almost made it the new capital of England - when in many of the towns and villages all round, we were rabid Parliamentarians.:D
In fact, I think York was sending more troops to Richard arriving too late, for Bosworth. Leicester will have meant about as much to Dick 3 as say a motorway service station would to us - just somewhere on the way to somewhere else. He didn't even die there anyway, if you want to stick him where he died - he died at Bosworth.
He was the last king of the House of York. He married in York. His son is buried not far from York. Richard spent time in York too. (I'm not sure whether he ever spent much - if any - time in Leicester, until he was dead and dumped in his grave, still bound which is one way of keeping him, I guess;)).
The fact that 500 years on Yorkshire people feel so strongly about this should tell you all you need to know. Rather than an obscene and undignified death-grip on the body for tourist £££s, it would do Leicester more credit to let him go home.
The man expressed a wish to be buried at York Minster. How hard is it to understand what is the right thing to do? Leicester can keep its little visitor centre, and will always now be associated with Richard III so can milk that with or without a skeleton.:D
This was the last king of the House of York. Not Leicester.
With or without a body - probably with, sadly - you will never get hoards of tourists... you'll only ever get East Midlands school kids forced to go there on school-trips. You do know that, right?
Just bumping this in case anyone from the other side wants to debate it. It seems most people here really aren't interested in the sound historical argument against a Leicester reburial.
Funny as well how people were so disgusted with the idea of him being in a "parish church" as they put it in Leicester but now York Minster don't want him a parish church in the Yorkshire wilderness would be fine!
I'd be cool with either, and made that plain from the start.:D
Because either would be better than what is going to happen.
Jewry wall museum, city gallery, watermead country park, just 3 things I found when googling things to do. Looks alright to me. Probably not going to visit but if I did I don't think I'd be bored.
Just bumping this in case anyone from the other side wants to debate it. It seems most people here really aren't interested in the sound historical argument against a Leicester reburial.
Well I didnt speak to that post as it was preaching to the choir for me
Thing is, as a tourist you go to Leicester to have a look then what else would you do in that dump?
Well there's the Jewry Wall (Roman), the castle area with St Mary De Castro, the Newarke Houses Museum, New Walk Museum, the Abbey Pumping Station and Museum of Technology, National Space Centre, Leicester Gas Museum, Framework Knitting Museum in Wigston, the Great Central Railway...etc.
Edit: Bradgate Park, Abbey Park, Watermead Country Park, Beacon Hill...
Jewry wall museum, city gallery, watermead country park, just 3 things I found when googling things to do. Looks alright to me. Probably not going to visit but if I did I don't think I'd be bored.
I've been there many times. Trust me, none of that is worth the petrol.;)
Funny as well how people were so disgusted with the idea of him being in a "parish church" as they put it in Leicester but now York Minster don't want him a parish church in the Yorkshire wilderness would be fine!
OMFG. I think I'm going to leave this thread alone as it's doing my head in.
The case IN FAVOUR of York and AGAINST Leicester is based on multiple arguments. The fact that Leicester's 'cathedral' is so mediocre is just ONE STRAND of a much larger picture. I pointed that out in the opening post of the thread, ffs!
e.g. Sheriff Hutton's parish church of St Helen and the Holy Cross is a Grade I listed building of national importance. It is a medieval structure that is almost unchanged since the 15th century. Sheriff Hutton is also where Richard III lived for years and it's believed the alabaster memorial in the church is where his son Edward, Prince of Wales, is interred. Its claim as a burial place for Richard III is significantly greater than Leicester's 'cathedral' on every level.
In fact, I think York was sending more troops to Richard arriving too late, for Bosworth.
Well maybe if York had got its finger out and sent them earlier we might have been spared this entire circular argument!:D
Leicester can keep its little visitor centre, and will always now be associated with Richard III so can milk that with or without a skeleton.:D
With or without a body - probably with, sadly - you will never get hoards of tourists... you'll only ever get East Midlands school kids forced to go there on school-trips. You do know that, right?
It's these infantile comments that undermine your whole argument and serve no purpose whatsoever. The thinly veiled and at times completely transparent bitching about "the Muslim City" that should bow down and "do the decent thing" as no one in Leicester gives a rats arse about English history as none of us were born here anyway", is all wearing a bit thin now.
You and Kappelmeister ( and one or two others) clearly have another agenda and at times have been just downright ignorant and rude on this forum. To be honest we residents of Leicester do feel a sense of pride in the achievements of the University and the sense of being involved in an important historical event- what's wrong with that?
Contrary to what you believe or the myths you seem to propoagate there is a lot of history and culture in Leicester for many to enjoy- not just medieval, believe it or not. Fair enough you don't like Leicester, each to their own; I think we can live with that!:)
There are clearly solid arguments for Richard to be buried in York, but equally there are many others supporting Leicester or other places. It doesn't really matter now though as the final posiiton has been stated on this matter. No, I don't think it will bring masses of money in tourism to Leicester, but it is good that the City Council are getting behind this and will hopefully make it a success. So what if it just attracts "loads of East Midlands school kids"- surely that can only be a good thing?
As others have said, like it or not, we do have a Cathedral and it may not be as aesthetically majestic as York or Westminster, but so what! Deriding its architectural flaws does not make it any less a Cathedral and it is to be the final resting place of Richard III, so, rightly or wrongly I'm afraid you will just have to come to terms with that.
Just bumping this in case anyone from the other side wants to debate it. It seems most people here really aren't interested in the sound historical argument against a Leicester reburial.
I've answered each point given. But you don't like Leicester anyway, you've said as much frequently, so your views are worth very little to me. Oddly I actually like York but it seems a shame about the people...
Just bumping this in case anyone from the other side wants to debate it. It seems most people here really aren't interested in the sound historical argument against a Leicester reburial.
It's nice to know that you all live in such wonderful, cultured locations in the UK, because you all must be to criticise Leicester in the manner that some of you are.
Ins and outs are whatever. If you don't like a place don't visit it again, or if you have to don't linger. Some of us quite like living in Leicester and while there are some horrible parts and run-down areas, I think you'll find every city in the country has the same.
As for Richard III, looks like he'll be buried in Leicester so people should just accept it than use it as an excuse to lambaste a city most have no idea about.
And as for those attacking our ethnic diversity. You can go back to the knuckle-dragging cave you came from.
Well maybe if York had got its finger out and sent them earlier we might have been spared this entire circular argument!:D
It's these infantile comments that undermine your whole argument and serve no purpose whatsoever. The thinly veiled and at times completely transparent bitching about "the Muslim City" that should bow down and "do the decent thing" as no one in Leicester gives a rats arse about English history as none of us were born here anyway", is all wearing a bit thin now.
You and Kappelmeister ( and one or two others) clearly have another agenda and at times have been just downright ignorant and rude on this forum. To be honest we residents of Leicester do feel a sense of pride in the achievements of the University and the sense of being involved in an important historical event- what's wrong with that?
Contrary to what you believe or the myths you seem to propoagate there is a lot of history and culture in Leicester for many to enjoy- not just medieval, believe it or not. Fair enough you don't like Leicester, each to their own; I think we can live with that!:)
There are clearly solid arguments for Richard to be buried in York, but equally there are many others supporting Leicester or other places. It doesn't really matter now though as the final posiiton has been stated on this matter. No, I don't think it will bring masses of money in tourism to Leicester, but it is good that the City Council are getting behind this and will hopefully make it a success. So what if it just attracts "loads of East Midlands school kids"- surely that can only be a good thing?
As others have said, like it or not, we do have a Cathedral and it may not be as aesthetically majestic as York or Westminster, but so what! Deriding its architectural flaws does not make it any less a Cathedral and it is to be the final resting place of Richard III, so, rightly or wrongly I'm afraid you will just have to come to terms with that.
Just to point out that a lot of people who wanted him buried in York do so because that's what he wanted himself and not because they dislike Leicester.
Putting aside Leicesters numerous failings and lack of real historical significance. I could understand it if it was Winchester or Warwick but Leicester !!!
There are clearly solid arguments for Richard to be buried in York, but equally there are many others supporting Leicester or other places.
Such as?? Come on, name them. So far, the only argument I've heard in favour of Leicester is that i) the University of Leicester has the final say in where the remains are reinterred and ii) the remains have already been in Leicester for 500 years. Those arguments are poor and fail to take into consideration Richard III's historical connections with Yorkshire and, significantly, what he himself would've wished.
I've answered each point given. But you don't like Leicester anyway, you've said as much frequently, so your views are worth very little to me. Oddly I actually like York but it seems a shame about the people...
He doesn't want a debate. People have been debating throughtout this thread. He's just interested in slagging Leicester residents off and filling the thread with racist undertones.
Comments
National space centre for a start.
Funny as well how people were so disgusted with the idea of him being in a "parish church" as they put it in Leicester but now York Minster don't want him a parish church in the Yorkshire wilderness would be fine!
:yawn:
Just bumping this in case anyone from the other side wants to debate it. It seems most people here really aren't interested in the sound historical argument against a Leicester reburial.
http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attractions-g186334-Activities-Leicester_Leicestershire_England.html
I'd be cool with either, and made that plain from the start.:D
Because either would be better than what is going to happen.
Jewry wall museum, city gallery, watermead country park, just 3 things I found when googling things to do. Looks alright to me. Probably not going to visit but if I did I don't think I'd be bored.
Well I didnt speak to that post as it was preaching to the choir for me
Well there's the Jewry Wall (Roman), the castle area with St Mary De Castro, the Newarke Houses Museum, New Walk Museum, the Abbey Pumping Station and Museum of Technology, National Space Centre, Leicester Gas Museum, Framework Knitting Museum in Wigston, the Great Central Railway...etc.
Edit: Bradgate Park, Abbey Park, Watermead Country Park, Beacon Hill...
I've been there many times. Trust me, none of that is worth the petrol.;)
Well I don't drive
So basically you just don't like Leicester and whatever anybody says you'll just be entirely childish about it as you have been up to now then.
OMFG. I think I'm going to leave this thread alone as it's doing my head in.
The case IN FAVOUR of York and AGAINST Leicester is based on multiple arguments. The fact that Leicester's 'cathedral' is so mediocre is just ONE STRAND of a much larger picture. I pointed that out in the opening post of the thread, ffs!
e.g. Sheriff Hutton's parish church of St Helen and the Holy Cross is a Grade I listed building of national importance. It is a medieval structure that is almost unchanged since the 15th century. Sheriff Hutton is also where Richard III lived for years and it's believed the alabaster memorial in the church is where his son Edward, Prince of Wales, is interred. Its claim as a burial place for Richard III is significantly greater than Leicester's 'cathedral' on every level.
Have you seen the price of train fares?:eek:
Well maybe if York had got its finger out and sent them earlier we might have been spared this entire circular argument!:D
It's these infantile comments that undermine your whole argument and serve no purpose whatsoever. The thinly veiled and at times completely transparent bitching about "the Muslim City" that should bow down and "do the decent thing" as no one in Leicester gives a rats arse about English history as none of us were born here anyway", is all wearing a bit thin now.
You and Kappelmeister ( and one or two others) clearly have another agenda and at times have been just downright ignorant and rude on this forum. To be honest we residents of Leicester do feel a sense of pride in the achievements of the University and the sense of being involved in an important historical event- what's wrong with that?
Contrary to what you believe or the myths you seem to propoagate there is a lot of history and culture in Leicester for many to enjoy- not just medieval, believe it or not. Fair enough you don't like Leicester, each to their own; I think we can live with that!:)
There are clearly solid arguments for Richard to be buried in York, but equally there are many others supporting Leicester or other places. It doesn't really matter now though as the final posiiton has been stated on this matter. No, I don't think it will bring masses of money in tourism to Leicester, but it is good that the City Council are getting behind this and will hopefully make it a success. So what if it just attracts "loads of East Midlands school kids"- surely that can only be a good thing?
As others have said, like it or not, we do have a Cathedral and it may not be as aesthetically majestic as York or Westminster, but so what! Deriding its architectural flaws does not make it any less a Cathedral and it is to be the final resting place of Richard III, so, rightly or wrongly I'm afraid you will just have to come to terms with that.
I've answered each point given. But you don't like Leicester anyway, you've said as much frequently, so your views are worth very little to me. Oddly I actually like York but it seems a shame about the people...
Exactly.
I make my Husband drive me places
Rubbish.
Ins and outs are whatever. If you don't like a place don't visit it again, or if you have to don't linger. Some of us quite like living in Leicester and while there are some horrible parts and run-down areas, I think you'll find every city in the country has the same.
As for Richard III, looks like he'll be buried in Leicester so people should just accept it than use it as an excuse to lambaste a city most have no idea about.
And as for those attacking our ethnic diversity. You can go back to the knuckle-dragging cave you came from.
Putting aside Leicesters numerous failings and lack of real historical significance. I could understand it if it was Winchester or Warwick but Leicester !!!
Such as?? Come on, name them. So far, the only argument I've heard in favour of Leicester is that i) the University of Leicester has the final say in where the remains are reinterred and ii) the remains have already been in Leicester for 500 years. Those arguments are poor and fail to take into consideration Richard III's historical connections with Yorkshire and, significantly, what he himself would've wished.
He doesn't want a debate. People have been debating throughtout this thread. He's just interested in slagging Leicester residents off and filling the thread with racist undertones.
It's probably the turncoat Dean