Some of the comments from local people are interesting. Especially the one stating that York isn't fit for a King because it floods a lot! Some people talk absolute drivel don't they?
Some of the comments from local people are interesting. Especially the one stating that York isn't fit for a King because it floods a lot! Some people talk absolute drivel don't they?
Actually I think a lot of the comments are quite sensible. But you ignore them, and pick up on one minor description, not presented in all seriousness.
Also, you don't pick up on this:
However, the exhumation licence issued by the Ministry of Justice states the remains should be buried in Leicester, and preparations for the body to be re-interred at Leicester Cathedral have already begun.
The people in Leicester involved in the dig were clearly smart enough to have the legal paperwork prepared to their advantage. The Yorkies couldn't have been that bothered, or they would have got involved at that stage. Only now the hard work is done do they want to get in on the act. To late Yorkies, you snooze, you lose!!!
Some of the comments from local people are interesting. Especially the one stating that York isn't fit for a King because it floods a lot! Some people talk absolute drivel don't they?
I thought the comments accusing York of being 'greedy' were hilarious too. The only reason Soulsby and his cronies want to keep the bones is out of sheer greed. To rebury Richard III in Leicester is utterly indefensible.
As for the poor, sad people of Leicester, bemoaning the fact that they have no tourist attractions, well tough s**t. You chose to tear down your city. If it looks like a s**t-hole then you've only got yourselves to blame. You can't now whine that no-one wants to visit the cesspit. As Simon Jenkins says "Modern Leicester is dire". It's debatable whether it can even be called an 'English city' any more, and the idea that the last of the Plantagenets will be reinterred there is repulsive to me.
I bet if there was a nationwide poll carried out then the vast majority of people would think it more suitable for Richard III to be buried in either York Minster or Westminster Abbey. Anything else would be a travesty, and the people of Leicester know it.
Leicester needs something to be famous for so what an opportunity, however I fully agree with you that it should be either York Minster or Westminster Abbey, both places are fit for a King.
As the suspected murderer of his young nephews, and perhaps his wife and even his brother - I think he should have been left in the car park.
Signed.
If he wrote a will expressing a wish to be buried in York Minster that is where he should be buried.
Leicester Cathedral wasn't even built when he was alive.
Signed.
If he wrote a will expressing a wish to be buried in York Minster that is where he should be buried.
Leicester Cathedral wasn't even built when he was alive.
I thought the comments accusing York of being 'greedy' were hilarious too. The only reason Soulsby and his cronies want to keep the bones is out of sheer greed. To rebury Richard III in Leicester is utterly indefensible.
As for the poor, sad people of Leicester, bemoaning the fact that they have no tourist attractions, well tough s**t. You chose to tear down your city. If it looks like a s**t-hole then you've only got yourselves to blame. You can't now whine that no-one wants to visit the cesspit. As Simon Jenkins says "Modern Leicester is dire". It's debatable whether it can even be called an 'English city' any more, and the idea that the last of the Plantagenets will be reinterred there is repulsive to me.
I bet if there was a nationwide poll carried out then the vast majority of people would think it more suitable for Richard III to be buried in either York Minster or Westminster Abbey. Anything else would be a travesty, and the people of Leicester know it.
What a stupid man. Get over yourself. He's staying in Leicester, so tough s**t to you.
At one time you had to be born in yorkshire to play for them and they took on the world..the only county dide that did that i think..it lost a bit of the shine for me when they relaxed that rule..
It's not an ancient rule though. Lord Hawke, an icon of Yorkshire cricket was born in Lincolnshire.
And that is the only claim that Leicester can legitimately make. It's a rather pathetic excuse, IMO.
What difference does it make really. If the Leicester university team hadnt bothered to investigate and dig - its likely he'd have remained in the carpark - nobody else over the past several hundred years seems to have been particularly bothered by his resting place.
Something tells me that these other claims to his remains are being driven by £ signs - rather than any real concern over his resting place.
What difference does it make really. If the Leicester university team hadnt bothered to investigate and dig - its likely he'd have remained in the carpark - nobody else over the past several hundred years seems to have been particularly bothered by his resting place.
Something tells me that these other claims to his remains are being driven by £ signs - rather than any real concern over his resting place.
Only Leicester is being driven by ££ signs, the city council especially. As has been pointed out on here, Leicester has nothing else to offer visitors and so they're desperate. That is hardly a good enough reason when, on principle, the remains should be returned to York or placed at Westminster Abbey.
St Mary de Castro might be a more fitting place than the Cathedral - it was after all a royal chapel for Leicester Castle whereas St Martin's Church was for the Guild. However, it isn't the closest consecrated ground to the original burial.
And that is the only claim that Leicester can legitimately make. It's a rather pathetic excuse, IMO.
Well - acording to a recent article in the telegraph (01 feb) - identifiable remains are usually required by law to be buried in the nearest graveyard to their discovery.
St Mary de Castro might be a more fitting place than the Cathedral - it was after all a royal chapel for Leicester Castle whereas St Martin's Church was for the Guild. However, it isn't the closest consecrated ground to the original burial.
At least St Mary de Castro is significant as architecture but it's still a parish church. No English king should be buried in a parish church, which is all Leicester 'cathedral' really is.
Comments
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/York-launches-battle-Leicester-Richard-III-s/story-18059586-detail/story.html
Some of the comments from local people are interesting. Especially the one stating that York isn't fit for a King because it floods a lot! Some people talk absolute drivel don't they?
A row has erupted between York and Leicester about which city has the right to bury Richard III's remains.
There are calls for a Leicester Cathedral interment, close to where he was found.
However King Richard grew up in North Yorkshire, and York City Council is writing to the Queen asking for permission to bury him at York Minster.
Video
Actually I think a lot of the comments are quite sensible. But you ignore them, and pick up on one minor description, not presented in all seriousness.
Also, you don't pick up on this:
That looks to be rather pertinent.
I agree.
I thought the comments accusing York of being 'greedy' were hilarious too. The only reason Soulsby and his cronies want to keep the bones is out of sheer greed. To rebury Richard III in Leicester is utterly indefensible.
As for the poor, sad people of Leicester, bemoaning the fact that they have no tourist attractions, well tough s**t. You chose to tear down your city. If it looks like a s**t-hole then you've only got yourselves to blame. You can't now whine that no-one wants to visit the cesspit. As Simon Jenkins says "Modern Leicester is dire". It's debatable whether it can even be called an 'English city' any more, and the idea that the last of the Plantagenets will be reinterred there is repulsive to me.
I bet if there was a nationwide poll carried out then the vast majority of people would think it more suitable for Richard III to be buried in either York Minster or Westminster Abbey. Anything else would be a travesty, and the people of Leicester know it.
As the suspected murderer of his young nephews, and perhaps his wife and even his brother - I think he should have been left in the car park.
Signed.
If he wrote a will expressing a wish to be buried in York Minster that is where he should be buried.
Leicester Cathedral wasn't even built when he was alive.
Also signed.
Here is hoping I never get you on my jury
What a stupid man. Get over yourself. He's staying in Leicester, so tough s**t to you.
Well, its hardly a secret that he was the main suspect - and the person who benefited most from their demise!
And that is the only claim that Leicester can legitimately make. It's a rather pathetic excuse, IMO.
Main suspect /= guilty.
It's not an ancient rule though. Lord Hawke, an icon of Yorkshire cricket was born in Lincolnshire.
Have him buried near your house. Then you can open your gift shop and coffee stand for the tourists before everyone else gets the chance?
What difference does it make really. If the Leicester university team hadnt bothered to investigate and dig - its likely he'd have remained in the carpark - nobody else over the past several hundred years seems to have been particularly bothered by his resting place.
Something tells me that these other claims to his remains are being driven by £ signs - rather than any real concern over his resting place.
I think you'll find there is legal paperwork too.
Only Leicester is being driven by ££ signs, the city council especially. As has been pointed out on here, Leicester has nothing else to offer visitors and so they're desperate. That is hardly a good enough reason when, on principle, the remains should be returned to York or placed at Westminster Abbey.
Well - acording to a recent article in the telegraph (01 feb) - identifiable remains are usually required by law to be buried in the nearest graveyard to their discovery.
At least St Mary de Castro is significant as architecture but it's still a parish church. No English king should be buried in a parish church, which is all Leicester 'cathedral' really is.