Basically why was Richard of YORK buried at Leicester??? It makes no sense AT ALL seeing as the only reason he was there was to fight them.
I understand what you're saying but I don't agree. We're not in Medieval England any more and if he got the choice to buried at York or Leicester wouldn't you think he'd want to be buried in York? And if we're going by tradition here then shouldn't he have been given a Catholic service instead of Protestant seeing as that was what he was.
Why York? He was of the House of York, but that doesn't mean he had any special ties to the city, other than a few years running the north of England on behalf of his brother. You wouldn't say that our present Queen must necessarily be buried in Windsor because of her name, would you?
He was born in Northamptonshire, was raised in London and the Netherlands, and was Duke of Gloucester. His wife is buried in Westminster and his son in Wensleydale. There are plenty of places which have as good as or better claims to him than York, so why not the place he died?
Oh, and by the way, if I recall the service held for him at the weekend was led by a Roman Catholic cardinal.
They should've gave his remains to the remaining members of his family line.
Richard iii probably has many thousands of descendants. Should everyone of them be able to contest where he should be buried?
so some King who lived/died centuries ago gets all this fanfare. Why? He wasn't even a King of note, not like Edward Longshanks, William I, Alfred the Great, Athelstan, or Henry I. These medieval Kings actually did stuff of importance. Even King John did technically and he's considered one of the ****tiest English/British monarchs ever.