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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I would love to see a TV mini-series on the Plantagenets. Their goings-on - widowed queens marrying their wardrobe masters, royal dukes being drowned in butts of malmsey wine, alleged bigamy, etc etc - makes even the most outlandish soap opera storyline look mild, LOL. Seriously, it'd be great to see a focus on the Middle Ages for once: there's so much emphasis on the period from the Reformation to the Glorious Revolution that what went before just seems to be overlooked.

I still think Richard had the Princes in the Tower murdered, but sadly we'll probably never know the truth of that!

The best way of matching up DNA is through a descendant via a female line only, because mitochondrial DNA is inherited from the mother, so e.g. the Tsarina Alexandra and her children could be IDd by a match with Prince Philip, as his mother's mother was Alexandra's sister, but it wouldn't have worked if his mother's father had been Alexandra's brother, if you see what I mean! It's amazing that they managed to find a female-line-only descendant across over 500 years, but I think it'd be a big struggle to find a female-line-only descendant from Alfred the Great's mother or sister.

The Duke of Gloucester is president of the Richard III Society. He's also Richard, Duke of Gloucester!
 
Oh good! There've been so many TV dramas about the Tudors, Queen Victoria and to a lesser extent the Stuarts, but the Plantagenets get totally overlooked. So long as they explain that it's a novel and that her ideas about Perkin Warbeck aren't "real"!
 
Baroness of Books said:
Who knows, maybe there will be "The Plantagenets" as the next royal mini-series; that would be phenomenal. Hollywood/BBC, are you listening?
Click to expand...

Well, I guess the BBC knows a good suggestion when it sees it! :D
 
Last edited:
I don't think 'The Plantagenets' could be a 'mini-series' and do them justice. A 'maxi-series' maybe when you list the Kings they have to deal with:

Henry II
Richard I
John
Henry III
Edward I
Edward II
Edward III
Richard II
Henry IV
Henry V
Henry VI
Edward VI
Edward V
Richard III

and Edward The Black Prince in there as well.

They are the longest ruling family in English history afterall and cover most of the high middle ages.
 
I guess we'd be in for a world of treat, albeit a lengthy one, if they did a series on the entire dynasty. For now, I'm happy with this one dealing with this particular segment of the family. I'd love to see one on Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, what a feast! "The Lion in Winter" set the standard for me with this ruler and his recalcitrant wife! I know the author Jean Plaidy wrote a series on the Plantagenets; I don't know if the books are still in print.
 
Last edited:
You could do a whole series on Henry and Elenore (based on Sharon K. Penman's books about them).


LaRae
 
I've read almost everything she's written. I cannot wait until her next book on Richard (Lionheart) comes out...I think later this year!


LaRae
 
I hope "A King's Ransom" comes out this year; I can't find a publishing date for it. It'll be sad to see the saga of this branch of the Plantagenet family come to an end with this novel.
 
I don't think there's a date for it either, I need to go check on her FB page (she does post there). As I understand it King's Ransom is the final book.


LaRae
 
Here's what I posted on a couple of Facebook pages I follow - so I guess I'm plagarizing myself LOL:

Here's a bit of the story of the bones that were found in the Tower of London in 1674: Planned construction work on the White Tower meant that a stone staircase from the late - 13th early 14th-century (two hundred years or so before RIII in 1483-85) needed to be removed. After it was removed, they dug down another 10 feet to set some new foundations and that was when a box of bones was reportedly found. They were thrown on a trash heap and forgotten for several weeks until someone remembered Thomas More (who was five years old in 1485 BTW) saying that the Princes had been secretly buried under a staircase (of course More went on to say they were moved elsewhere later but no one remembered that part) and added two and two together and came up with five. The trash heap was torn apart and bones were found and interred as the Princes in a very moving urn in Westminster Abbey. Just how they could have been "secretly buried" in one night in a very busy place under a stone staircase that had been undisturbed for 200 years that took days of back-breaking labor to demolish defies explanation. The "scientific" study in 1933 of the bones followed More's account (which Shakespeare used as the basis for his play) almost to the letter - they "knew" beforehand what they were going to "find". Modern anatomists have looked at the poor-quality photographs of the bones available and not only could they not tell if they were male or female or how old they were at death several have expressed doubts that they are even all human.

It has been announced (and I'm paraphrasing here) that there will be no further study of those bones for two reasons: 1) if they are the princes there would be no way to definitively determine when they died or by whose hand so why disturb them? and 2) if they are not the princes, what would they do with them?
 
Last edited:
I read a very interesting book awhile ago by Vanora Bennett, "Portrait of an Unknown Woman," an historical fiction that floats the possibility of the younger Prince Richard's survival from the Tower and his identity as John Clement living as a member of Thomas More's household. It mentions the very famous portrait of the More family painted by Hans Holstein and the subtle clues found in that portrait possibly revealing his true identity.

Here's another recommendation for a book about the lost princes:

Richard III Society of NSW » The Lost Prince
 
Last edited:
finally find the body! he will be buried in windsor or westminster?
 
:previous:
Leicester it is.


Leicester Now Virtually Certain to be Richard III’s Final Resting Place
The question on Richard III’s final resting place seems to have been resolved after York withdrew its candidacy, leaving Leicester as the only serious contender for the honour.

Although Leicester had always been the frontrunner, support for York has been steadily growing. Over 11,000 people had signed a petition to bring King Richard’s remains to York. After all, Richard III was a representative of the House of York (the branch of the House of Plantagenet) and he was extremely popular there. When news of his death reached York, the city elders recorded how the King who had “mercifully” reigned over them was “piteously slain and murdered to the great heaviness of the city”.
Click to expand...
 
Artemisia said:
:previous:
Leicester it is.
Click to expand...

Some people up here aren't too happy with the withdrawal and will continue to petition for Richard's burial in York. It's a regular feature on Look North.
 
I hope you succeed.

I have nothing against Leicester but it's hardly a suitable place for the King's reburial. For the past 500 years, he lay there, humiliated and forgotten. Now, there is a chance to give Richard a proper farewell, at a place that has a better association. Some place like York where was genuinely loved and the place he himself cared for deeply.
 
I imagine he'd be interred at York Minster, and whilst Leicester "found" him. There are no ties for him there as a royal.
 
There has been a 'reconstruction" of how Richard might have sounded, in a West Midlands accent, by professor in England, posted on Miss Honoria Glossip. It's posted elsewhere as well. The article I read said he had West Midland ties more than York, although he reigned from York and was popular there.
Richard's DNA haplogroup, articles have also said, has been found to be J1c2c (with the "c" not clear yet--could be another digit than "c" at the end of J1c2, like "b").

The haplogroup J would be his maternal haplogroup, which would indicate his mother came from that group, which is relatively recent, originating 4000-plus years ago in the Middle East, in the area then occupied by Israel and the area surrounding, as in Biblical Ur and Arabia. The J haplogroup is a minority group in Europe, hitting its height in Ireland, where the modern Irish have 11% of population in the J1C2b group, which my Irish mom and I fall into. This is technical stuff beyond my complete understanding but I thought I'd post it as a matter of some interest. I get tangled up when speaking of genealogy, in which I am not trained, but it's fascinating, and was used to verify the remains of Richard in the carpark. His modern "nephew" is Michael Ibsen, a British carpenter who has this haplogroup.
 
Mariel said:
he article I read said he had West Midland ties more than York, although he reigned from York and was popular there.
Click to expand...

The main point in this is that he was the last King of The House of York, not of the West Midlands or Leicester.
 
Artemisia said:
I hope you succeed.

I have nothing against Leicester but it's hardly a suitable place for the King's reburial. For the past 500 years, he lay there, humiliated and forgotten. Now, there is a chance to give Richard a proper farewell, at a place that has a better association. Some place like York where was genuinely loved and the place he himself cared for deeply.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Richard and York had a reciprocal relationship where he was greatly loved and respected by that city and he had deep ties there, not only because he was of the House of York. To be buried just feet away from his ignominious burial in an unmarked grave under a car park is just wrong to me, with no disrespect meant to the city of Leicester. I feel it would bring the last Plantagenet king more honor and respect to bury him in York Minster, and I hope York repetitions for this to happen.
 
Last edited:
I absolutely agree. York is the most appropriate place for his reburial.
 
Should it happen, I would not like to be the person tasked with letting the people of Leicester know that the remains are to be buried in York.

My preference would be Westminster Abbey personally, but if not, it makes sense for him to be laid to rest as close as possible to the spot where he has been resting in relative peace for over 500 years.
 
At the moment, it's going to be Leicester - something to do with exhumation licences and the idea being to rebury him as close as possible to where he was originally buried. Leicester is very keen on the idea because it'll attract tourists - I understand that from their point of view, but I really think he should be buried at York Minster. There's some talk of the leader of York City Council writing to the Queen, but there's no way the Queen'll intervene.
 
It should be a Catholic funeral/interrment as well.


LaRae
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Richard III (1452-1485) and Queen Anne Neville
Replies
6
Views
912
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
T
Complete List of Monarchs and Legitimate Pretenders of the Kingdom of Jerusalem
Replies
4
Views
4K
Troy Thompson
T
R
King Stephen (Stephen of Blois) - (c. 1092-1154)
Replies
23
Views
5K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
Anna was Franziska
  • Locked
DNA and the law
4 5 6
Replies
153
Views
23K
Warren
Warren
ysbel
Identification of the Remains of the Romanov Family by DNA Analysis (Gill 94) (1994)
Replies
3
Views
6K
lexi4
L

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom