They've just decided Richard III won't be buried in York

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

You have to look at this document:

www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/richard-3rd-judgment-.pdf

It is cracking me up, properly. There's something so funny about seeing it all set out like that.

Just seen Tom Holland on twitter suggest Fotheringhay, the church where many York royals were buried. What do you think?

Are members of the royal family coming to Leicester for the funeral?

Interesting! I'm looking forward to the programme tonight.

Viva I haven't seen anything so I guess not! They aren't related to him AFAIK. The Archbishop of Canterbury is doing the service.

Even though they're not related to him he is a former monarch and it's a shame that someone couldn't represent then royal family. Even if it was a lesser royal. Seems odd to bury a king like this.

Maybe someone is going on Thursday?

Sophie Wessex and the Duke of Gloucesterwill be there. I think it should be some one more senior.
I hope Philippa Langley has a front row seat, she's mad as a hatter but I think R3 would never have been found without her.

Ah thanks Marie.

That makes sense because he was the Duke of Gloucester! And also the third son of a monarch.

Forgive me if I am being a bit thick here. Not really my area of expertise! But, if the car park where he was found used to be a church with a grave yard, are there not lots of other bodies to be found under there?

How come the first one they found just so happened to be old king Ricky?

Just checking in. I don't have live TV and this is one of the few times I miss it.

On the Catholic thing, though - we do know he seems to have been fairly devout. I think it's likely he would have had a position on Protestantism - I think it beggars belief that someone living then would have heard of some of the C of E views on sacraments etc., and not been shocked.

Doesn't mean I think any of this is avoidable - just saying.

Personally, and in a selfish way, I think they should have got someone to reconstruct and perform a medieval Catholic funeral mass. It has been done before, for other services, so could have been done. But I think people would have found it looked too much like pageantry and didn't feel respectful.

I don't know a great deal about it. But I think he should be buried where he would have been buried if he'd not died in a Leicester car park.

He didn't die in the car park - he died on the battlefield, which is now someone's farm. I did wonder, reading the summary of where they're taking the body, why he can't be buried in the churchyard which apparently still has soldiers from both sides buried in it? But perhaps that's just too small.

Still, as a noble, he was buried in the nave (IIRC) rather than in the graveyard. There wouldn't have been lots of bodies under the church itself.

StillScottish they were following accounts of the burial from the time I think.

And then there was the letter R painted on the tarmac to guide the way!

And I think they started digging in the area of greatest probability - why not?

jeanne love the idea of a medieval Catholic funeral Mass - although I don't believe the Catholic church would have one as that already happened at his original burial (funerals are naturally a one time event). His reinterment could obviously have had original prayers, chant and liturgy which would not be inappropriate, and his beliefs would be virtually the same as a contemporary Catholic so no cognitive dissonance there.

Although the Greyfriars would have been Franciscan, the following are modern congregations of Benedictine monks in England and France praying chant that would be typical of Richard's period.

Buckfast, Devon - the only Catholic monastery rebuilt after it's destruction during the reformation. Fontgombault Catholic Benedictine seminary France.

But you can redo funeral masses, can't you? Nor burial rites, but the mass would have been re-sung several times anyway?

I really don't think his beliefs would be the same as a contemporary Catholic!

A Mass can be offered but not another funeral mass - a reinterment is a reburial not a re-funeral.

Thank you!

I am used to seeing them referred to as 'funeral masses' in the plural, but that may well just be a difference between medieval and modern nomenclature.

That makes sense because he was the Duke of Gloucester! And also the third son of a monarch.

And the present Duke of Gloucester is named Richard.

The liturgy will be different - they will both be a mass. Another example is a mass during which wedding vows are exchanged and a regular Sunday liturgy, both can be a full mass.

Ah, sorry, hey, I think I posted unclearly. I was saying couldn't they do a funeral mass (and I was thinking of the kind that get referred to in medieval wills, as 'funeral masses to be said for 5/10/50 years'). You thought I meant the kind that's performed once and only once.

I think they could do what I'm suggesting without any theological bad implications?

I'm really amazed by the strength of feeling people have about it happening at all, though. I'm watching on twitter and some people are hugely in the 'Richard is evil' camp. It's fascinating.

Is there a Richard hashtag Jeanne?

I have swapped all my motherly duties over to DH to watch this afternoon, I can't wait. Are we stuck with C4? Does the BBC not get it?

I haven't seen one but there must be. I was actually trying to ignore it all until I could watch TV on catch up, but have got totally sucked in!

He's trending!

Jeanne I think his beliefs about what mass is and why we are there would be the same. Also the need for an appropriate Catholic burial. I am assuming practicing, believing Catholics like Richard.