Richard of Leicester or York?

You may have seen the spectacular re-burial of Richard III at Leicester Cathedral today. There were elements of British pageantry, eccentricity, and controversy all in the one occasion. The ceremony was a celebration of his life over five hundred years ago. As well as the great and the good in attendance, people came dressed in period costume. Below the surface there simmered a controversy as the whether Richard should be buried in Leicester at all, but rather in York.

He was of course the last of the Yorkist kings, whose demise on the battlefield of Bosworth directly led to the rule of the Tudor kings and a period of profound change and renaissance for England. So a hugely significant historical figure, but is he one deserving of the pomp of a state funeral. After all if you believe Shakespeare he murdered the princes in the tower as well as being an all round despot. However Shakespeare was writing from the perspective of the victor who in a form of propaganda was trying to burnish the image of the Tudors. In all probability Richard was no better or worse than any other contemporary ruler. In such bloody and unstable times it is probable that a king had to be ruthless in order to maintain his throne. At what point does a figure become rehabilitated? I am not sure that this can be quantified, but had Richard lived and the Plantagenet line been maintained it could be argued that England would have been more riven by bloody dispute. So by all means bury Richard with ceremonial, but do so in the knowledge that he was in all probability a ruthless ruler who probably should not serve as a contemporary role model.

So the burial in Leicester was a recognition that Richard had been brought to Leicester from the nearby battlefield of Bosworth Field. There he was buried in a monastery that in the due course of time became a car park. Now the good burghers of York became very excited by this. It is a travesty that Richard is not buried in his home county of Yorkshire. By some un-known logic they it is what he would have wanted. I suspect that actually what he wanted was to win the Battle of Bosworth and establish himself as a powerful monarch. Indeed if we look a English kings since 1066 it is only a small exceptional few who are not buried in either Windsor or London, and none in the North of England.

So I think any argument about the location of his burial is more about how many tourists a town attracts rather than a logical argument in favour of either Leicester or York.

I think the argument about giving him a state funeral is much more interesting and means that I will devote some more time to studying his real behaviour and characteristics. So to me the jury remains out, but I do hope that Leicester gains tourist numbers from the burial.