Richard III found under a carpark!

Madam wrote: »

I wonder if we'll find out if he really was disabled in some way(curvature of the spine being one of his ailments supposedly)?

Yes, the spine DID show signs of late childhood scoliosis, but Shakespear[e] got it wrong about the withered arm.

As a very long time member of the Richard III Society, I am very happy that the last King who could call himself English without his tongue being firmly in his cheek will get a proper burial at last.

tac

This is a massive find - to be able to identify a skeleton that is more than 600 years old from an archaeological dig is remarkable. The continuing evidence that will emerge from this will significanly enhance the historiography of this period.

I'm amazed at how easy it was to find him! Obviously, it wasn't easy for Philippa Langley, who I'm sure spent months and months researching his possible burial places, but to arrive at the carpark and find the bones in one of their opening trenches is amazing.

Alicat wrote: »

I'm amazed at how easy it was to find him! Obviously, it wasn't easy for Philippa Langley, who I'm sure spent months and months researching his possible burial places, but to arrive at the carpark and find the bones in one of their opening trenches is amazing.

What amazed me is that the letter "R" was written there.

tac foley wrote: »

the last King who could call himself English without his tongue being firmly in his cheek

English me arse! His granny was a Westmeath woman (Anne Mortimer) and his great granny, Isabella of Castille, was Spanish.

He could have played for a number of teams.

I'm just coming to the end of the C4 documentary here, and I have to admit to being fascinated.....BUT.....
And I don't mean to be stirring stuff here, how can there be a state funeral? The current heads of state are from the house of Windsor, so how can they allow a state funeral for a member of the house of Plantagenet?

redlead wrote: »

I find it interesting that the ceremony in Leicester Cathedral will presumably be an Anglican one despite the fact that Richard III was Catholic. Whose decision is this? It is all the more ironic due to the fact that it was Henry Tudor who killed him whose son went on to create the Anglican church. It doesn't bother me in the least, but I'm surprised that more of an issue isn't being raised that his burial ceremony will not be conducted in his own faith.

The CofE claims to the direct descendent of pre-reformation Christianity. But true, Richard would be more used the Latin Mass as once practiced by the Roman Catholic Church. However, he may not have been comfortable with some developments like Vatican II!

knucklehead6 wrote: »

how can there be a state funeral? The current heads of state are from the house of Windsor, so how can they allow a state funeral for a member of the house of Plantagenet?

Ah come on now. Richard was the third cousin seventeen times removed of the current sovereign, Elizabeth II.

To name but one connection.


Richard III and Margaret Beaufort, Countess of Richmond were third cousins, each having been a great-great grandchild of King Edward III.

Margaret Beaufort was the mother of Henry VII, nemesis of Richard III and a direct ancestor of the current queen. Her (Margaret's) direct line of descent goes through the Tudors, branching off into the Stuarts and from there to the Hanoverians who became Kings of England in the 18th century when it was decided that Papists were unsuitable for the job.

If you go back far enough his ancestor was a monkey: same as us all.
That said:
Facinating history!
Facinating forensics!
Facinating Telly!
I feel privileged to have lived in such a time>

tac foley wrote: »

The decision was announced this afternoon - Richard's remains will be laid to rest in Leicester Cathedral next year.

Quote -
The battle over where Richard III's remains will end up has been won - by the city where his body was found under a car park.

Leicester has ended up being the final destination for the king's remains after York, the other contender, gave up the fight.

York Minster announced that it believed the King's remains should be commended "to Leicester's care".

Support for York as a final resting place had been growing with 11,000 people signing a petition calling for his remains to be brought to the city.
As a member of the House of York, Richard III would have regarded York as the centre of his support.

But people in Leicester had been equally keen for his remains stay in the city. He was buried there for more than 500 years since being taken to the city following his death at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485.

End Quote.

tac

Disgraceful!
I move that we catholics dig up Guy Fawkes.

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

I would not call Margaret a direct ancestor? Depends what you mean by direct. The Tudor-Stuart link isn't that bad, but the Hanoverian one was..didn't they pass 60+ Catholic claimants? They ARE related, but barely.

What other meaning of direct ancestor is there?

Margaret Beaufort WAS a direct ancestor of the current queen. This is fact, so far as can be demonstrated with genealogical records.

She was the Great Great Great (times 15) grandmother of Queen Elizabeth II

Margaret Beaufort was the mother of Henry VII who as well as being the father of Henry VIII was also the father of Margaret Tudor who married James IV of Scotland.

She was the mother of James V of Scotland who was the father of Mary Queen of Scots.

She was the mother of James VI of Scotland who became James I of England once Henry VIII's direct descendants died out.

James I, was father of Charles I and also the father of Elizabeth Stuart who married Frederick V, Elector of Palatine and briefly King of Bohemia.

For several reasons, one of them being that they were a protestant family, Frederick and Elizabeth were booted off the throne of Bohemia by forces of the Holy Roman Empire in what started off the notorious 30 Years War(s) in Europe. They became known henceforth as the Winter King and Queen of Bohemia, for being the wrong religion on the wrong throne at the wrong time.

With history's great tendency for irony, their grandson was to benefit from his Stuart cousins being excluded from their rightful ascension to the throne of Britain precisely because they were Catholics and therefore the wrong religion for the wrong throne at the wrong time.

Frederick and Elizabeth's daughter was Sophia of Hannover who was mother of George I of Britain. He was parachuted on to the British throne in the early 18th century, despite not having a word of English, because the Act of Settlement following the Williamite Jacobite Wars (or the Glorious Revolution as the British call it) insisted on only protestants being eligible for the monarchy.

George I was father of George II who was grandfather of George III who was grandfather of Queen Victoria.

She begat Edward VII who begat George V who begat George VI who was the current queen's daddy.

Clear now?

We are off shortly to see the last real King of England buried properly.

tac

Very droll.

You will, of course, now direct me to where we can visit the grave of a King of Ireland and pay our respects.

tac

Interesting to note that EVERY English monarch who died before the reformation is now buried in a Church of England church of one kind or another.

I guess that the two churches can live with it, after all, the head of the RC Church in England was at the initial funeral service - if he had any reservations about it he certainly didn't say anything.

Besides, there are only a couple of RC cathedrals in the country - 'Paddy's Wigwam' in Liverpool, and Westminster Cathedral in, uh, Westminster, neither of which had anything to do with Richard III. I 'spose that the RC Cathedral in Armagh might have been a possibility, but Richard, as far as we know, never went to Ireland for anything.

tac

This is England. There appears to be a marked absence of militant Christians of any particular persuasion.

As for the comment on making a tourist attraction in Leicester, I agree that the place could certainly use some help in improving its image as the city with the largest population from the Indian sub-continent AND the largest covered market in the UK.

The main problem that you seem to be representing is that of suddenly having to deal with a lost king who has had over 500 years of bad press, but according to the church teachings has been forgiven and absolved of all his sins, and is now having a long-overdue Christian burial, as is his due as the anointed king of England etc..

Having been a member of the R3S for many years, I'm well-used to dealing with day-to-day coals heaped on the head of a man who was well-loved by his people in the North, and greatly-mourned at the time. After all, what was England getting in return? A half-Welsh/half-French usurper with no real history?

tac

who the fug wrote: »

How are they squaring burying a Catholic in a Protestant church.

From the Catholic point of view, this is not a problem. The Irish countryside is filled with Anglican churches in whose churchyards numerous Catholics are buried. It has never been an aspect of Catholic teaching or practice that Catholics have to be buried in a place owned or managed by the Catholic church.

tac foley wrote: »

The main problem that you seem to be representing is that of suddenly having to deal with a lost king who has had over 500 years of bad press, but according to the church teachings has been forgiven and absolved of all his sins, and is now having a long-overdue Christian burial, as is his due as the anointed king of England etc.

He had a Christian burial the first time around. He was buried in the choir of the Franciscan friary in Leicester, which would be a fairly high-status burial place. SFAIK there was a funeral mass and committal at the time. The service being said this time round is a (multidenominational) memorial service, not a funeral service, because he has already had a funeral. About ten years after the burial, Henry VII paid for a marble and alabaster tomb on the spot where he was buried. It was only after the dissolution of the monasteries and the demolition of this particular abbey that the memory of the location of his burial place was lost.

Leicester Cathedral was chosen for the reburial as it's the nearest active burial place to the spot where he was found - in fact it's just across the road. The general rule in England for bodies exhumed during archaeological or construction work is that they should be reburied in a burial ground as close as possible to where they were found, and if any other bodies had been uncovered in the dig they too would have been reburied in the Cathedral. There was some suggestion that this was not solemn or dignified enough for a king, and that he should be reburied in Westminster Abbey or York Minster, and there was also a suggestion that he should be reburied in a Catholic location - Arundel Cathedral was mentioned, but it's a long way away. But in the event it was decided to stick with the original option.

At least King Richard III wasn't left under the carpark. In Ireland there would have been some development built on top of him (Wood Quay, Frescati Shopping Centre etc.) and perhaps a plaque - or even worse an OPW Interpretative Centre.