Richard III (1452-1485): Discovery of Remains and Reburial


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
:previous:
I agree about the relatives bit: heck. I am a direct descendant of Richard's sister and niece but I doubt anyone is interested in my opinion. But I strongly disagree it doesn't matter where he is buried. Richard III was a King of England, a good or bad one is debatable; as such, he deserves a reburial that will signify that.

As for Leicester vs. York debate, personally I am firmly on the latter's side for various reasons, most of them already mentioned in this thread.
 
I suppose it's only natural that Richard's relatives many times over would come out of the woodwork to put in their two cents', but I have to agree with them about the location of his tomb. And Richard being a King of England certainly deserves better than being reinterred back in the parking lot. Team York for burial!:D
 
Last edited:
York didn't pay for the excavation, Leicester did. Leicester wins - they cared enough to find out to actually pay for the work to be done, to agree to the disruption to their city the excavation caused, and gave permission for it to happen.
 
Leicester paid for the excavation because the the car park was in Leicester. York would have paid if the car park was in York. That argument doesn't give an advantage to Leicester in anway.
Disruption to their city? You mean the closing down of a tiny car park? I'd bet nobody even knew what was going on until they actually found something.
 
Wonder who will be the first medium to contact Richard from the great beyond and find out what HE wants. :whistling:

Actually from what I know, I would vote for York.
 
Wonder who will be the first medium to contact Richard from the great beyond and find out what HE wants. :whistling:

Actually from what I know, I would vote for York.

No one can contact Richard the third because he has been dead for 500 years ......
 
Somewhere in the middle of this debate we should remember that these are human remains that should be interred with due reverence, preferably in a church of this person's religion. I think that means Catholic and not Anglican.
 
Somewhere in the middle of this debate we should remember that these are human remains that should be interred with due reverence, preferably in a church of this person's religion. I think that means Catholic and not Anglican.

As EIIR already pointed out he's had a Catholic Funeral and if they want to bury him with the "majesty" he deserves, they're not going to find anywhere well known like Leicester Cathedral or York Minster as we happen to be a COE country now.
 
Is is written down that he was given a proper Catholic burial at the time of his death? From what I understand his body was not treated very kindly.


LaRae
 
From what I understand his body was not treated very kindly.

His body was buried in the nearest church available which was where it was found last year. The circumstances of his death say everything about why his body wasn't given the royal send off.

I am unsure as to the Catholic burial as I was quoting another poster.
 
I'm trying not to smile but possibly we have accidently found the "third way".

Westminster Cathedral.
 
His body was buried in the nearest church available which was where it was found last year. The circumstances of his death say everything about why his body wasn't given the royal send off.

I am unsure as to the Catholic burial as I was quoting another poster.


I had read that his body was buried at a nearby (location of his death) abbey that was later destroyed by Henry VIII....I have no idea if that is factual or not.


LaRae
 
I'm trying not to smile but possibly we have accidently found the "third way".

Westminster Cathedral.

Don't joke. Daily Mail might take you seriously. :lol:
 
I had read that his body was buried at a nearby (location of his death) abbey that was later destroyed by Henry VIII....I have no idea if that is factual or not.


LaRae

It would definitely have been catholic because at the time it was all we had
 
I had read that his body was buried at a nearby (location of his death) abbey that was later destroyed by Henry VIII....I have no idea if that is factual or not.

LaRae

That seems to have been the case. He's not the only one to have been lost in such a way; Alfred the Great's remains were lost during Henry's reign, then found again in 1788 when a prison was being built, and subsequent the coffins were stripped and the bones scattered.

Don't joke. Daily Mail might take you seriously. :lol:

There are worse suggestions. How about St George's Chapel, right beside his brother?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but was he not buried in the Greyfriar's church by the Franciscan monks themselves? I very much doubt that they would bury anyone, least of all an anointed King of England, without performing the usual rituals of a Catholic funeral.

Didn't Henry VII actually pay for a marble tomb to be built for Richard III? Obviously the dissolution of the monasteries some 40 years later saw the church destroyed and the graves lost.

I predict we'll see a rash of archeological digs for the 'lost' remains of other royals/notable individuals. When you consider the huge worldwide media interest in the University of Leicester's search, I imagine other archeologists will be desperate for a slice of the action.
 
It would definitely have been catholic because at the time it was all we had


Right the Reformation didn't happen until later...I was just wondering if he had any burial at all or if he was just tossed in the ground due to the situation at the time of his death.


LaRae
 
There are worse suggestions. How about St George's Chapel, right beside his brother?

Westminster Cathedral!! St Georges Chapel!! How would you explain it to those poor people of York who are crying out for their beloved Richard to be returned to their loving arms??
 
Leicester paid for the excavation because the the car park was in Leicester. York would have paid if the car park was in York. That argument doesn't give an advantage to Leicester in anway.
Disruption to their city? You mean the closing down of a tiny car park? I'd bet nobody even knew what was going on until they actually found something.


If Leicester hadn't given their consent for the excavations no excavation would have taken place.

If they hadn't paid for it do you think York would have done so? I doubt it.

York Minster has made its views clear - they believe he should stay where he has been for the last half millenium.
 
Westminster Cathedral!! St Georges Chapel!! How would you explain it to those poor people of York who are crying out for their beloved Richard to be returned to their loving arms??

Westminster Cathedral is the leading RC Cathedral in the UK but wasn't around at the time of Richard.

St Georges - no way - it is now a CoE and there is no room - the only room is in the George VI chapel and those spaces are ear-marked for The Queen, Philip, Charles and Camilla.

The loving people of York can reimburse Leicester for the cost of the excavation and find an appropriate place to bury him noting that the Minster has said 'he should stay in Leicester and is full anyway.
 
If Leicester hadn't given their consent for the excavations no excavation would have taken place.

If they hadn't paid for it do you think York would have done so? I doubt it.

York Minster has made its views clear - they believe he should stay where he has been for the last half millenium.

York Minster are being clever with what they say and by that logic it's the car park yes?
No York wouldn't have paid for him to be excavated, the car park wasn't in York, I still don't see the logic in this. Why should the loving people of York reimburse Leicester, they chose to dig him up on the whim of some archeologist, their choice. Leicester gave it's consent for a tiny piece of car to be dug up, I would bet money that nobody on the rubber stamp committee believed in this project.

People of York want him buried in York, the people who found him in Leicester want him buried in Leicester also most likely the people of Leicester council want him as a prestige marker.

I think I'll moving towards NGalitizine's view of burying him back in his car park and people can visit the museum they're building. He'll be forgotten again next year.
 
Last edited:
The "politics" of this is that the Dean of York who has said York doesnt mind RichardIII staying in Leicester, was formally Dean of LEicester.

Now I might have the job title wrong - working from memory again - but she who gave the ok for a Leicester burial definitely was at LEicester Cathedral before.

Conspiracy theorists at the charge......
 
The "politics" of this is that the Dean of York who has said York doesnt mind RichardIII staying in Leicester, was formally Dean of LEicester.

Now I might have the job title wrong - working from memory again - but she who gave the ok for a Leicester burial definitely was at LEicester Cathedral before.

Conspiracy theorists at the charge......

Now that I didn't know! That just makes this even better.

How much money do they think they're going to make off this guy? Everyone knows his history, where he's from etc, he just happened to be buried/dumped in Leicester when he died.
 
There are also international archaeological conventions at play here - that remains are buried as close as possible to where they are found after all scientific tests have been completed if the remains aren't to go on public display in a museum, which again has to be as close as possible to the place where the remains were made.

Obviously if you think only a small part of the car park was affected during this dig you haven't been to a dig - they take up a lot more space than just the dig area - in fact a normal dig would be 4 - 5 times the size of the actual dig area.

Leicester isn't a normal tourist place and so won't make much money after the first year or so and York won't make any more than it does now. Ask yourselves - how many people would travel to Leicester to see the remains of Richard III? Not many. How many more people would travel to York to see him - again not many - and York is already crawling with tourists year round with so much to see there already.
 
I say cremate what's left of him, stick him in some urn with his coat of arms embossed (such a nice touch), and let him travel round the country like a Catholic relic or statue. Now, one does not have to be as maudlin about such things as the Spanish or Italians, I'm sure that the British can find something a bit more suitable to British culture.
 
Gracie, are you suggesting an "Antiques Roadshow for Richard" type of scenario here? :D
 
Now that I didn't know! That just makes this even better.

How much money do they think they're going to make off this guy? Everyone knows his history, where he's from etc, he just happened to be buried/dumped in Leicester when he died.

Dean of York goes to the police over Richard III hate mail - Telegraph

I cant tell you how chuffed I am that remembered it was the Dean! I am of a certain age and this is soooo reassuring!

Also - and is SERIOUS (actually that is EXPENSIVE, as in lawyers) stuff

Gordons prepares for JR over York burial for Richard III | News | The Lawyer
 
I say cremate what's left of him, stick him in some urn with his coat of arms embossed (such a nice touch), and let him travel round the country like a Catholic relic or statue. Now, one does not have to be as maudlin about such things as the Spanish or Italians, I'm sure that the British can find something a bit more suitable to British culture.

Nooooooooooo! Catholics are not cremated - at least they weren't back then. How could they rise again if they were ashes? Its his beliefs we need to respect, not ours.

ps if they were burnt at the stake as a martyr, that is completely different.
 
Back
Top Bottom