End of long winter of discontent for Richard III?
“My eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!” exclaims the prophet in this Sunday’s reading from the Book of Isaiah. This past Monday the world got a look at the remains . . .
“My eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!” exclaims the prophet in this Sunday’s reading from the Book of Isaiah. This past Monday the world got a look at the remains of King Richard III after DNA tests confirmed that a skeleton found in a shallow, unmarked grave under a parking lot was indeed that of the long-disgraced English monarch, who died in 1485.
The find has given new impetus to a move to rehabilitate the king's reputation. Richard III enthusiasts hope the new attention will inspire a reappraisal that will show the king to have been a man with a strong sympathy for the rights of the common man who was deeply wronged by his vengeful Tudor successors. Far from the villainous character memorialized in English histories, films, novels, and Shakespeare’s damning representation of him as the limping, withered, haunted murderer of his two princely nephews, Richard III can become the subject of a new age of scholarship and popular reappraisal, his supporters believe.
“I think he wanted to be found, he was ready to be found, and we found him, and now we can begin to tell the true story of who he was,” said Philippa Langley, a writer who has been a longtime and fervent member of the Richard III Society, an organization that has worked for decades to bring what it sees as justice to an unjustly vilified man. “Now,” Langley added, “we can rebury him with honor, and we can rebury him as a king.”
Alas, that reburial will not come without controversy of its own as the city of Leicester, where he was unceremoniously buried without a coffin, vies with York, a city 100 miles to the north that claims the late monarch as his own.
"The decision has already been made," said Leicester mayor Peter Soulsby. "All the permissions have been granted and the various authorities involved have agreed that the interment will take place in Leicester."
Not so fast, said York, which is petitioning the government and Queen Elizabeth II, arguing that "one of the city's most famous and cherished sons"—who grew up in the region and was once known as Richard of York—should be buried in the northern city.
Homily hint: While King Richard was no saint and his bones are not the relics of a martyr, the discovery of his skeletal remains reminds us of Christian beliefs about relics and how physical remains can evoke the memory and presence of a saint.
The find has given new impetus to a move to rehabilitate the king's reputation. Richard III enthusiasts hope the new attention will inspire a reappraisal that will show the king to have been a man with a strong sympathy for the rights of the common man who was deeply wronged by his vengeful Tudor successors. Far from the villainous character memorialized in English histories, films, novels, and Shakespeare’s damning representation of him as the limping, withered, haunted murderer of his two princely nephews, Richard III can become the subject of a new age of scholarship and popular reappraisal, his supporters believe.
“I think he wanted to be found, he was ready to be found, and we found him, and now we can begin to tell the true story of who he was,” said Philippa Langley, a writer who has been a longtime and fervent member of the Richard III Society, an organization that has worked for decades to bring what it sees as justice to an unjustly vilified man. “Now,” Langley added, “we can rebury him with honor, and we can rebury him as a king.”
Alas, that reburial will not come without controversy of its own as the city of Leicester, where he was unceremoniously buried without a coffin, vies with York, a city 100 miles to the north that claims the late monarch as his own.
"The decision has already been made," said Leicester mayor Peter Soulsby. "All the permissions have been granted and the various authorities involved have agreed that the interment will take place in Leicester."
Not so fast, said York, which is petitioning the government and Queen Elizabeth II, arguing that "one of the city's most famous and cherished sons"—who grew up in the region and was once known as Richard of York—should be buried in the northern city.
Homily hint: While King Richard was no saint and his bones are not the relics of a martyr, the discovery of his skeletal remains reminds us of Christian beliefs about relics and how physical remains can evoke the memory and presence of a saint.
Sources: Articles by John F. Burns for the New York Times and the Associated Press