Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
By Royal dissent
IN RESPONSE to Nigel Under-wood’s letter on Richard III of August 21, I would very staunchly ask him to revise his views that after Richard’s defeat at Bosworth he “stopped being able to get what he wanted” and “his powers of self-determination ended”.
After all, members of the British Army who are sadly killed in combat abroad are not laid to rest in the nearest churchyard in Kabul or Baghdad; they are brought home to be buried by their relatives. Why should we deny Richard III this privilege, even though many years have passed?
His ancestors want him back in York and his home county. He is a human being not a visitor attraction requiring a visitors’ centre that Leicester Cathedral intend to create.
Philip Graves, Stockton Lane, York.
• LEICESTER resident Nigel Underwood’s reasoning makes complete sense (Letters, August 21).
Taking the obvious York emotion out of the argument, Richard III should stay buried near to where he fell. Is there any documented proof that Richard said where he wanted to be buried?
Times and traditions were completely different in the 15th century compared to today, so leave well alive. There is something ghoulish about the Richard III Society’s obsession with these old bones.
Geoff Robb, Hunters Close, Dunnington, York
Comments are closed on this article.