The radio this morning was already talking about hunting for the body of the next 'lost' king - Alfred the Great. Expect vast swathes of Winchester to be dug up soon.
Printable View
The radio this morning was already talking about hunting for the body of the next 'lost' king - Alfred the Great. Expect vast swathes of Winchester to be dug up soon.
There are so many legends about Alfred they could do worse than to start looking in the Multi-story car park
(sorry)
I got riled up by the lead-in to the story on one of the US networks. Made it sound like some ground breaking discovery that will radically alter our understanding of important historical events. It's nothing of the sort. It's interesting and important, but it really is relatively unsurprising (his body was found near where he was buried!?!) and confirms the historical accounts we have. But leave it to the TV news to make it sound all salacious and to pander to the desire to hear that "everything you were taught was wrong." /rant
Archeology has a long and proud history of finding things where they are known to be. I mean there was a large "R" painted on the tarmac where Richard was - how many clues do you need?
I hear there is some discussion where he should be buried. Leicester Cathedral might want him because that's where he died and was buried. York Minster might want him because he is from York. However, he was a Catholic so he should probably be buried in a Catholic place of worship, although other Kings and Queens from before the break with Rome are still buried in Westminster Abbey, which is now Church of England. The monarch was head of the Church of England, officially at least, and that's the state religion. However, the England's break with the Catholic church happened under Henry VIII, his enemy's son. The Church of England was established by his enemy's grand-daughter, Queen Elizabeth. It seems unlikely Richard III would want to be buried by the church established by his enemies rather than his own religion.
In his will he left a lot of money to York Minster to have prayers said for his soul there, (common practice at that time) but he didn't stipulate where he wanted to be buried. However If you are given a licence to exhume a body you are obliged by the terms of that licence to rebury it in the nearest consecrated ground - as the Leicester Cathederal faction have been pointing out repeatedly.
Yes they should have left her in the car park, silly woman. I lost count how many times she started crying and over nothing. She'd clearly built up her own mental image of what Richard meant to her (?) and when the body didn't meet those expectations or the face reconstruction, she well, started crying again.Quote:
The woman from the Richard III society was a pain though.
It is however a massive find and one which should really have had an bigger media response.
I heard on the radio this evening, that linguistic experts have decided that Richard would have spoken with a 'Brummie' accent.
Shakespeare will never be the same.
http://youtu.be/7sueCfdwefQ
Oi yow, whurr's me orse ?
Would there have been such a thing as a 'Brummie' accent when he was alive, I wonder?
As to his notoriety, I think also of Tutankhamen, who also ruled for only a short time, but is wildly famous today because they found his tomb.
It has been fascinating reading ya'll's comments. Keep 'em coming. :)
It seems Leicester has stolen a march on it's rivals. The Council has already bought a school building next to the car park for £850,000 and plans are well in advance for a "museum" (visitor centre really) and while that is being set up, a temporary exhibition is nearly ready now. If York want the remains I think they'll have to invade and take them by force.