Where to bury Richard III

[cressida]

In 1933, the bones were exhumed and examined. They were also photographed. The doctors who performed the examination concluded based on several clues that the bones could certainly belong to the princes. Unfortunately, authorities at Westminster Abbey have forbidden further examination of the bones, to date

 

---------- Post added 07-02-2013 at 16:47 ----------

 

The 2012 Leicester archaeological dig has prompted renewed interest in re-excavating the skeletons of the "two princes", but Queen Elizabeth II has not granted the approval required for any such testing of an interred royal.[19]

Edited February 7, 2013 by cressida

[Plain Talker]

Scientists want to make DNA tests on the bones of the princes but the Queen and others have forbidden it

 

I read in 'Daughter of Time' that there was a possibility they had been sent to Richard's sister's court - she was married to the Duke of Burgundy

 

In the Phillippa Gregory novel, "The Red Queen", the same idea was also postulated. (it might have been in her novel "The White Queen")

Edited February 7, 2013 by Plain Talker

[cressida]

As they had already been declared illegitimate they could be safely sent away

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Mind, the Princes do continue to manufacture quite good tinned fish.

[cressida]

Mind, the Princes do continue to manufacture quite good tinned fish.

 

Oh Jeffrey:D

 

---------- Post added 07-02-2013 at 17:31 ----------

 

Perkin Warbeck and Lambert Simnel both purported to be a Plantagenet prince

 

- the latter I believe gave his name to a cake, Simnel cake

Edited February 7, 2013 by cressida

[Alien52]

Oh Jeffrey:D

 

---------- Post added 07-02-2013 at 17:31 ----------

 

Perkin Warbeck and Lambert Simnel both purported to be a Plantagenet prince

 

- the latter I believe gave his name to a cake, Simnel cake

 

Total myth,and there is no Warbeck cake either.Simnel cake first around in12th C.

[algy]

Scientists want to make DNA tests on the bones of the princes but the Queen and others have forbidden it

 

 

I don't think the Queen is involved. According to the Beeb it's the Abbey authorities who won't allow it. They think it might set a precedent for digging up any other past royal there may be a conspiracy theory about in the future.

[cressida]

This was from google:-

 

 

The 2012 Leicester archaeological dig has prompted renewed interest in re-excavating the skeletons of the "two princes", but Queen Elizabeth II has not granted the approval required for any such testing of an interred royal.[19]

 

---------- Post added 08-02-2013 at 17:35 ----------

 

York want him buried there and Leicester's Mayor want him to be buried there,

 

I would think he would prefer York

[Phanerothyme]

York minster actively does not want him buried there.

[I1L2T3]

AFAIK; Catholics accept that Anglican funerals are valid and Anglicans accept that Catholic funerals are valid.

 

It's probably safest to give him a Catholic burial I reckon given that he was a catholic. But then what jurisdiction (if that's the right word) do the current Royal Household have given that he was a past king.

 

What would Richard III think if he'd known that the family that were his mortal enemies (the Tudors) would eventually launch an attack on the Catholic faith which would persist for centuries. Would he have wanted to be buried in one of the replacement faith's churches?

 

He was buried in a Catholic friary originally so why not bury him in the nearest Catholic friary to the car park?

 

---------- Post added 08-02-2013 at 18:05 ----------

 

This was from google:-

 

 

The 2012 Leicester archaeological dig has prompted renewed interest in re-excavating the skeletons of the "two princes", but Queen Elizabeth II has not granted the approval required for any such testing of an interred royal.[19]

 

---------- Post added 08-02-2013 at 17:35 ----------

 

York want him buried there and Leicester's Mayor want him to be buried there,

 

I would think he would prefer York

 

In a non-Catholic cathedral?