Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Last battle for Richard III as burial plans disputed in court
Reuters ^ | Fri Aug 16, 2013 | Estelle Shirbon

Posted on 08/16/2013 6:49:10 AM PDT by xzins

Descendants of Richard III won a court battle on Friday over where to bury the medieval monarch, whose bones were found under a car park last year, but were urged not to embark on a legal version of the Wars of the Roses in which the king died.

In one of the most remarkable archaeological finds in English history, a skeleton with a cleaved skull and a curved spine was formally identified as Richard's remains by DNA testing in February this year.

Depicted by William Shakespeare as a deformed tyrant who murdered his two young nephews to strengthen his grip on power, Richard was killed in 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth, the last king of England to perish on a battlefield.

The University of Leicester, which led the quest to find, exhume and identify Richard's remains, obtained permission from the Ministry of Justice to reinter the king at the cathedral in Leicester, which is close to Bosworth in central England.

But descendants of the monarch, who was the last king of the Plantagenet dynasty, went to court arguing that Richard should instead be laid to rest in the cathedral in York, the northern English city with which he had close links during his life.

In a ruling delivered on Friday, High Court Judge Charles Haddon-Cave said the ministry had been wrong to give the green light to the Leicester burial plan without engaging in wider consultation on a matter of wide public interest.

"

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: burial; kings; richardiii

1 posted on 08/16/2013 6:49:10 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All; SunkenCiv

under a parking lot?


2 posted on 08/16/2013 6:50:47 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The parking lot had once been the Black Friars monestary where Richard was reputedly buried.


3 posted on 08/16/2013 6:53:35 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The parking lot had once been the Black Friars monestary where Richard was reputedly buried.


4 posted on 08/16/2013 6:53:35 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins
This was the "Lion-heart" king....what blasphemy!

How fickle is history.

5 posted on 08/16/2013 6:54:47 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

Richard I was the Lionheart.


6 posted on 08/16/2013 7:00:00 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

Richard I was Lion heart, this is Richard III


7 posted on 08/16/2013 7:00:20 AM PDT by commish (The takers rule. Time to implement the triple G plan - GOD, GUNS, & GOLD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: xzins
From reading too many books/history of Lancaster, Yorks, Tudors etc.....it is my small formed opinion it was not good to be king....or royal.
8 posted on 08/16/2013 7:01:17 AM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain
This was the "Lion-heart" king....what blasphemy! How fickle is history.

Richard I (1157-1199) was the king called "lion heart."

9 posted on 08/16/2013 7:01:44 AM PDT by Blennos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Now is the winter of our discontent...


10 posted on 08/16/2013 7:03:21 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

A horse, a horse ... my kingdom for a horse!


11 posted on 08/16/2013 7:08:50 AM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

‘Lion Heart was Richard I. This is Richard III, much maligned. His brother Edward IV died with 2 sons. They were the appropriate heirs to the throne. The two sons wound up in the Tower of London....for their alleged protection, but disappeared, thus Richard III became King.

Many nefarious deeds were attributed to Richard III due to the influence of the Tudors who followed after Richard III was killed in Battle with Henry VII, father of Henry VIII.


12 posted on 08/16/2013 7:11:47 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight

Were not the remains of two young children found in/near the tower of london recently, and believed to be the two sons?


13 posted on 08/16/2013 7:21:23 AM PDT by Conservative4Ever (I'm going Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson

Did they not know that it was a former monastery and the place of Riii’s burial?


14 posted on 08/16/2013 7:22:24 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight

“two sons” Edward and Richard. I believe Edward’s legitimacy was challenged. But they were ‘disappeared’ alright. There’s a famous painting of the two that was done about 400 years after their death.
Yep, the Tudors made the saying real: ‘The winners write the history books.’


15 posted on 08/16/2013 7:33:47 AM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: All armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It's fiction but you will learn some surprising facts about Richard III if you read:

The Daughter of Time

Here is a line from one of the Amazon reviews of the book:

"What thoughtful reader hasn't experienced Shakespeare's Richard III and wondered about the accuracy of the Bard's portrayal? Thus did Josephine Tey, near the close of her authorial career, delve into some of the lost nooks and crannies of English history in an effort to recover "the real Richard."

16 posted on 08/16/2013 7:40:33 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
the last king of England to perish on a battlefield.

Then they figured out they should lead from behind.

17 posted on 08/16/2013 7:52:48 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

FYI, Rowan Atkinson is NOT a British historian..


18 posted on 08/16/2013 7:55:38 AM PDT by jimmygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

No wrong Richard..

This is Dick the Turd..


19 posted on 08/16/2013 7:58:35 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
And Henry VII was haunted throughout his reign (it is believed) because he feared the real heir to the throne (Edward's son) would appear....

There is thought that the Queen (in sanctuary with her children) was asked to send the 2nd son to join the first at the tower....but instead substituted an impostor & ferreted her real son away into hiding.

Years later when Henry VII was king (after killing Richard 3rd), they 'found' someone, a grown version, claiming to be that very son.....and promptly hanged him.

20 posted on 08/16/2013 8:01:22 AM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

I read a book a couple of years ago which put forth the theory that Margaret Beaufort, Henry VII’s mother was the one who arranged for the the ‘death’ of the two boys. Then, when Richard III was ‘wasted’, there would be no other contenders.

Margaret was in England always plotting for her son (Henry VII) to return from France and battle Richard for the throne.

We will never know the facts or truth!


21 posted on 08/16/2013 11:02:41 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
I would probably agree with that from what I've read...

..she was quite the conniver.

22 posted on 08/16/2013 2:41:47 PM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Conservative4Ever

I think it was determined that they were not related and even the wrong ages and from the wrong time. Lots of small children murdered and buried in London.


23 posted on 08/16/2013 3:30:02 PM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: facedown
Richard I was the Lionheart.

Thank you.

24 posted on 08/16/2013 4:35:52 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Blennos
Richard I was the Lionheart.

Thank you.

25 posted on 08/16/2013 4:36:25 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Conservative4Ever; Mercat
Were not the remains of two young children found in/near the tower of london recently, and believed to be the two sons?

Two skeletons were discovered buried in urns near the White Tower of the Tower of London in 1674. Charles II (the King at the time) ordered their burial in Westminster Abbey on the assumption that they were probably the bones of Edward V and Prince Richard, Duke of York. In 1933, the bones were disinterred and examined, and were found to be those of two children of approximately the right ages. They were then reinterred. They have remained so ever since.

With modern scientific methods, more information might be gained than was possible in 1933, especially if DNA could be extracted, but so far this has not occurred.

Two bodies of children found buried in the tomb of Edward IV and his Queen in St George's Chapel, Windsor in the late 18th century, have also been identified at times as possibly being the Princes from the Tower (they were after all, the sons of George IV) but the information about these is much more murky.

26 posted on 08/18/2013 5:11:30 AM PDT by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: naturalman1975

Source?


27 posted on 08/18/2013 5:16:05 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Did they not know that it was a former monastery and the place of Riii’s burial?

The Monastery at Greyfriars had long been identified as the likely burial site for Richard III, but when the monasteries were dissolved by Henry VIII, there were rumours that the body had been disinterred and disposed of in a number of different ways, and the monastery was demolished, and new streets and buildings built on the site and its precise location was lost. It was only in 2007 when a building was demolished that archaeologists were able to dig and began to pin down the location of the monastery again (slightly west of the modern street called Greyfriars which had been the assumed location until then). That lead to the more detailed, more recent archaeological digs, which found the bones, and then worked out where in the old church they had been located.

28 posted on 08/18/2013 5:20:59 AM PDT by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

I’m a history teacher and am pulling this out of my memory - can’t remember where I learned it at this point, but it’s not exactly obscure knowledge - I think any decent encyclopedia with a relevant entry, or any book covering the history will mention it.


29 posted on 08/18/2013 5:24:32 AM PDT by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mercat
Edward V

The large blue boxed text at the bottom of this page, pretty much gives the same information I gave, about the bodies interred in the Abbey.

30 posted on 08/18/2013 5:28:46 AM PDT by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson