I won't wax lyrical about this as it seems so simple. He was a King of England, his wife (Anne Neville) is buried in Westminster Cathedral and so it is obvious that he should be buried with her. Now, she hasn't got a grave marker, as (according to the Westminster Abbey site) was killed the same year at Bosworth. So somewhere near the alter seems fitting, but disrupting floors and foundations to get his bones sort of nearby seems excessive, but he was KING OF ENGLAND. If any recent monarchs' corpses were ignominiously tombed, wouldn't we want future citizens to take up the cause, pay respects appropriately and bury them with as much pomp and circumstance as their position deserves?
I can see that a State Funeral might be a bit of a damp squib (go on, how many of The IT Crowd fans wanted me to write damp squid?) given that throngs of adoring/morning subjects who felt the impact of his reign aren't available.
But he really deserves much more than he is getting. We're grateful that he's been found (shame that the female archaeologist busted open the cranium accidentally, though) but now we must muster more effort to recognise his contributions.
I also agree with this blog that correctly asserts that a Catholic funeral would be necessary given the faith he held upon his death (presumably).
Our Most Anticipated Queer Books for July 2025
-
Pride month may be over, but we read queer all year, and these are our top
picks for new LGBTQ+ books coming out July 2025.
The post Our Most Anticipated...
No comments:
Post a Comment