FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Where should Dick be buried?
Where should Dick be buried?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
York are claiming him because his son is buried there, he was married there and his family are from there.
Leicester counterclaim that they only allowed the dog to go ahead on the condition that if he was found he was to be reinterred, in Leicester, no later than one year after he was found.
A deal's a deal? Or should he go 'home' to York? Or maybe even to London where all the other Kings & Queens of England/Britain are sleeping? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"York are claiming him because his son is buried there, he was married there and his family are from there.
Leicester counterclaim that they only allowed the dog to go ahead on the condition that if he was found he was to be reinterred, in Leicester, no later than one year after he was found.
A deal's a deal? Or should he go 'home' to York? Or maybe even to London where all the other Kings & Queens of England/Britain are sleeping?"
I think he should be buried in either York or london, York as that was his homeland and london because he deserves a royal burial |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"York are claiming him because his son is buried there, he was married there and his family are from there.
Leicester counterclaim that they only allowed the dog to go ahead on the condition that if he was found he was to be reinterred, in Leicester, no later than one year after he was found.
A deal's a deal? Or should he go 'home' to York? Or maybe even to London where all the other Kings & Queens of England/Britain are sleeping?
I think he should be buried in either York or london, York as that was his homeland and london because he deserves a royal burial "
I'm thinking York as I'm sure he would have made his wishes known about where he wanted to be buried and his connections are with that city. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I see a three way poker game between York, Leicester and Westminster abbey with the Archbishop of Canterbury as dealer.
Just to make it interesting they could put a long un on the side |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I see a three way poker game between York, Leicester and Westminster abbey with the Archbishop of Canterbury as dealer.
Just to make it interesting they could put a long un on the side"
Fuck off, there's nothing interesting in Leicester, we're having him  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king."
in agreement with that..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king.
in agreement with that..
"
So am I! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In truth there is very little real evidence that he had the young princes murdered, much of it was Tudor propaganda
They did disappear though."
But did they?, over the years I have read all manner of accounts of how they died of common measles in London, were exiled and died abroad of malaria.....the truth is that there is lots of conjecture and no evidence of things either way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In truth there is very little real evidence that he had the young princes murdered, much of it was Tudor propaganda
They did disappear though.
But did they?, over the years I have read all manner of accounts of how they died of common measles in London, were exiled and died abroad of malaria.....the truth is that there is lots of conjecture and no evidence of things either way."
I understood that what was believed to be their bodies were found buried in the tower and are now in westminster abbey, if not i want my money back |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king."
what a waste of public money that would be! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
little interest in the past,present or future of the worlds sovereignty..apart from historic interest
thats about it, couldnt give a toss where when how they get buried |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king.
what a waste of public money that would be!"
I'd be in the crowd of pretend grievers..I knew him so well.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king.
what a waste of public money that would be!
I'd be in the crowd of pretend grievers..I knew him so well.."
were you with all the other sad sacks at Diana's planting? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I do actually believe he should be given a proper burial and one that's in keeping with his regal roots. (I'm not a Royalist!) I think a state funeral and a burial in Westminster is what is befitting of a king.
what a waste of public money that would be!
I'd be in the crowd of pretend grievers..I knew him so well..
were you with all the other sad sacks at Diana's planting? "
wait till u read my book about the princess and the paupers swinging parties |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Given the misfortune of the young princes I'm surprised he hasn't been arrested by operation yewtree"
Ah....it is now thought that he didn't kill the princes in the tower. That it was Henry VII who started the rumor to blacken his name as Henrys claim to the throne was very weak. 'twas a dastardly Tudor plot, worthy of a Shakespearian play, mayhap. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Infact, my fellow fabsters, methinx time is upon me to enter into the spirit of times gone by and with a flourish and adroitness which will hearken back to Bosworth fields, will henceforth be conversing only in Tudor style. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
Whether he killed the princes or not he DID steal the throne from the oldest of them. As their uncle he was NOT the rightful heir to the throne.
Usurpation of the throne is treason. So, burial in Westminster? Nope. I still say chuck his bones back where they were found. Too much time, money and effort has gone into the old traitor as it is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Given the misfortune of the young princes I'm surprised he hasn't been arrested by operation yewtree
Ah....it is now thought that he didn't kill the princes in the tower. That it was Henry VII who started the rumor to blacken his name as Henrys claim to the throne was very weak. 'twas a dastardly Tudor plot, worthy of a Shakespearian play, mayhap. "
The timeline disputes that though as Edward (the eldest of the missing princes) was crowned Edward V on the 9th April 1483, with his uncle Richard (III) as protectorate. The boy King disappeared shortly after (he is officially listed as losing the crown on 25th June 1483) and Richard was crowned on 26th June 1483. Henry Tudor disputed his claim to the throne and two years after Richard became King, Henry killed him at Bosworth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
It's all hypothetical really as Leicester Council only gave the go ahead on the condition that if he was found he would remain in Leicester. The Richard III Society agreed to that so must honour the deal they made.
Leicester it is then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"York are claiming him because his son is buried there, he was married there and his family are from there.
Leicester counterclaim that they only allowed the dog to go ahead on the condition that if he was found he was to be reinterred, in Leicester, no later than one year after he was found.
A deal's a deal? Or should he go 'home' to York? Or maybe even to London where all the other Kings & Queens of England/Britain are sleeping?"
As in all things, a deal is definitely a deal.
Leicester agreed to the exhumation on the basis he'd be re-interred there. Welshing on such a deal will deter others from participating in genuine research. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"What about cremating him..."
Feck me, he's already been stabbed, lobbed into a hole in the ground, had various buildings parked on top of him, and then had a steamroller build a fookin car park on him, and now you wanna burn the poor sod. Give him a break eh?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aceytopWoman
over a year ago
from a town near you |
"York are claiming him because his son is buried there, he was married there and his family are from there.
Leicester counterclaim that they only allowed the dog to go ahead on the condition that if he was found he was to be reinterred, in Leicester, no later than one year after he was found.
A deal's a deal? Or should he go 'home' to York? Or maybe even to London where all the other Kings & Queens of England/Britain are sleeping?
I think he should be buried in either York or london, York as that was his homeland and london because he deserves a royal burial "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
yes i know the Richard iii society funded the dig..
and yes they made a dealwith Leicester city council..
but, did they have any authority whatsoever to do so..?
they were not his kin, 'he' is not a vase or other artifact..
his remains are that of a King so precedent should be followed surely...?
have this cynical suspicion that York and Leicester both want him for reasons more to do with selling trinkets to tourists than anything else..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
