Richard III & the Car Park

[Errata]

To be clear, I don't think the coffin is at all related to Richard or to the mysterious woman. Never really did.

To Explain:

There is a book that was assigned to most people my age in the States at some point, called the Robber Bridegroom by Eudora Welty. Southern author, quite good. Anyway. About few chapters into the book, this sentence appears.

"He followed along
up the Natchez Trace, keeping his eye out for
the dress, and once he thought he saw it floating
on the creek, but it was only the lily pads, and
once he thought he saw it flying in the sky, but
then he heard a distant moo, and it was only the
old flying cow of Mobile going by."

That's right. Flying cow of Mobile (which is in Alabama by the way). Now this cow never appears again in the story, and is bizarre even by the standards of the Eudora Welty. It has nothing to do with the narrated events. Yet there it sits. Flies. Whatever. In all it's avian/bovine glory.

Now for the life of me I can't tell you what happened in the book after this sentence, because it caused a traffic accident in my head. I only even read the rest of the book to find out more about this flying cow, only to be disappointed.

The coffin is my flying cow from Mobile. I know it has nothing to do with the events under discussion, but it caused a five car pileup in my head. For no apparent reason, I am stuck on the mystery of the possibly empty coffin.

[Errata]

Can I just take this opportunity to thank all of you who have posted in this thread for the approach you have taken. It demonstrates, for me, all the great qualities and potential of Casebook.

We have shared information, some of it priveleged, we have discussed, illuminated, been adult, disagreed (without any sort of subtext) and it has been a pleasure. There has been no ego, no selfishness, no arrogance - just a cordial spirit of helpfulness. Shows what we can do if away from "Jack" for a while, doesn't it?

Phil H

I would like to second this, if I may. While my history is pretty good in any country, I had no idea how much my own views were dictated by what I experience, which has a lot to do with being an American and a Jew. Quite simply, intellectually it is very easy to accept that people do things differently than you do (how you treat your dead, how you build, how you dig) but it is very easy to see everything through your known context, which may not be the context that actually applies.

The digs of the American South are just different that in England. To an extent, we aren't that far from our frontier roots. And while if I had thought about it I would have realized that, I didn't especially think. And you guys sort of coaxed me through that. Jews don't entomb, we don't bury indoors, we don't move bodies. And while I certainly knew that others do it differently, I was reacting with a certain amount of disbelief that others did that, because it is beyond my experience.

I may be wrong a thousand different ways, I may run off on tangents, I may make unclear jokes, I may be thick headed, and who knows, I might even be right a time or two. But you guys educated me and explained to me, and never once called me an idiot or said I was wrong. Just gently pointed out that something I said was unlikely.

I can get the bit between my teeth on certain subjects. And I know I did on this one. But you guys have been awesome about it. And while I see no reason that the same consideration cannot be used concerning Jack, I know that it is often not so.

[Sally]

Yes, it's been a very enjoyable discussion (if talking about it in the past tense means its over, I'll be sad )

I think it goes without saying that there are some... ahem..'entrenched' veiws regarding the case and those connected with it. If one thinks differently, it can be discouraging. Who wants to be abused and shouted down for expressing an opinion? I know that sort of attitude has driven several fine posters away.

'Entrenched' wasn't meant to be a joke, by the way, although it could have been if I'd thought of it!

Anyway, the founder's tomb was lower down stratigraphically than the other two graves; perhaps not mentioned because it is considered earlier and with no connection to 'Richard'. I'm not sure the female has either, for reasons stated earlier in the thread; but they could be contemporaneous. That makes her of more potential relevance to the story.

[Steve S]

It has been fun............

[Phil H]

I hope it's not over yet! I certainly have some more background material to post.

I was just taking the opportunity to comment on something I had been reflecting on for a couple of days - how nice this thread IS!! And how helpful and informative. For someone as interested in this discovery as anyone could be, it IS fabtastic to be able to share view, discuss ideas and receive important information in the way this thread make possible.

So keep looking in folks - the show's not over YET!!

Phil H

[RivkahChaya]

That's right. Flying cow of Mobile (which is in Alabama by the way).

Yeah. I remember that. Apparently it's an obscure term for a weather phenomenon, that gets referenced in, of all things, an X-files episode. It's a fake ballad Welty wrote, at a time when a lot of authors were starting books with snippets of real ballads, because there was a fad for writing books that were based on myths and fairy tales. The Robber Bridegroom is based on a fairy tale, but it also parodies the form, something teachers don't usually bother to mention to high school students, for whom the parody doesn't "play" anyway, if they haven't read any straight examples of that kind of book. The flying cow doesn't moo. It's a joke.

It caught on though, and you can find dozens of businesses in Alabama called "the flying cow."

The big "distracted by the wrong thing" for me was always the egg beater that separates using the principle of "specific gravity" in Witness for the Prosecution (the movie). I miss half of what comes next (including Marlene Dietrich's wonderful first scene, until the actual trial begins, because I keep wondering how the heck that egg-beater is constructed.

[Monty]

Breaking news

I have just heard, on the local news, that the dig site is to remain open.

It is to be covered by a tent whilst a decision is being made.

Also a decision is being made about the actual grave itself. What that is I've no idea.

Just thought I'd share.

Monty

[Phil H]

Thanks for the update, Monty. I might try to pop over to Leicester this week to take a gander.

I suppose a "royal grave" - the site where Richard was interred for 500 years might have some importance per se.

Possible reasons for a decision that occur (none may be correct) are:

a)they are considering replacing the body in the place where it rested for so long - but if so they cannot cover it with tarmac again. (My own view would be that they will reinter the remains elsewhere, but...)

b) the Richard III Society want to mark the former grave in some way - they put up memorials a LOT - Leicester (several), Fotheringay, Middleham etc - anywhere associated with Richard.

c) the local authority considers the grave site a potential tourist attraction at least in the medium terms and is considering what to do;

d) something has come up in initial forensic investigation and they may need to "go back in";

e) considerations of expanding the dig.

Any one think of any more. No doubt there will be an annoyuncement in due course. Or Monty will find our from his sources.

Thanks again, Monty.

Phil H

[Sally]

C and E are the most likely, I think. Hopefully, all will be revealed in due course. I still want to know who's inside the stone coffin

[jason_c]

Thanks for the update, Monty. I might try to pop over to Leicester this week to take a gander.

I suppose a "royal grave" - the site where Richard was interred for 500 years might have some importance per se.

Possible reasons for a decision that occur (none may be correct) are:

a)they are considering replacing the body in the place where it rested for so long - but if so they cannot cover it with tarmac again. (My own view would be that they will reinter the remains elsewhere, but...)

b) the Richard III Society want to mark the former grave in some way - they put up memorials a LOT - Leicester (several), Fotheringay, Middleham etc - anywhere associated with Richard.

c) the local authority considers the grave site a potential tourist attraction at least in the medium terms and is considering what to do;

d) something has come up in initial forensic investigation and they may need to "go back in";

e) considerations of expanding the dig.

Any one think of any more. No doubt there will be an annoyuncement in due course. Or Monty will find our from his sources.

Thanks again, Monty.

Phil H

This would be the most likely explanation in my opinion. At a minimum there will be a plaque; possibly a visitors/education centre. Business plans and feasibility studies will be being set up as we speak. I doubt the entire car park will be re-tarmacked without some changes.


edit: There will be battle royale about what is actually included in any visitor or educational centre

[Phil H]

We we certainly find out about the contents of the stone coffin given time - whether the/any remains will be identifiable is another question. Unless there is an inscription.

There will i suspect be several "battles" to come:

a) over where Richard (if it is indeed he) should be reburied;

b) whether his bones should lay in state for public view;

c) what will be done to the site. As I understand the site is owned by the Council that should not be too much of a problem.

Phil H

[Steve S]

And as it's only a hundred yards or so from the Cathedral,there's a good tie-in........

[Errata]

I still think he should be buried with Anne. There is sort of four factors in this. Sentimentality, Intent, History, and Protocol.

Sentimentality is going to drive the discussion, and perhaps because we are human it should. I think he should be buried with his wife, and that is sentiment. It's also assigning feeling to those who clearly no longer have them, but we do that with our dead. The people of the city where he is currentl interred (whose name I cannot remotely spell this early) are sentimentally attached to him, and will want to keep him. Certainly economic factors don't hurt. But most of the debate will reflect how we treat our dead, and as someone who has long been a student of human behavior in all forms, this is the part that interests me the most.

Intent is a factor today, and should be a factor for those long dead. Where was he supposed to be buried? Had he died in his sleep, where would he be? What were his expectations and wishes. And if we don't know, should we guess?

History is the coldly logical side of the coin. What happened, happened. It cannot be changed, and should not be changed to reflect something that did not happen. He should stay where he is, because that's where he is. It is the end of his story, and moving him would suggest that his story may have ended another way.

But in the end it is Protocol that will win the day. He was a King of England. There are rules and expectations that go along with that. If protocol states that barring another choice, he would have been buried in Westminster (for example) then to Westminster he will go. And sentiment, intent, and history will have to put aside their arguments and bow to the will of the rule of social expectation.

But anyone in their right mind wants to go out like a Viking I always say.

[Phil H]

I don't think there was any certainty WHERE Richard himself thought of being buried.

His brother Edward IV was in St George's Chapel, Windsor.

His wife - I think her grave may have been in the old Lady Chapel - replaced later by the present Henry VII Chapel. Her present resting place is modern. Indeed, her gave may have been temporary until the king determined where he himself would rest.

Other potential grave sites include Middleham, Yorkshire - his alleged favorite home and in his belowed north.

Fotheringhay - the mausoleum of the House of york, where his father, mother and elder brother Edmund, rest.

Maybe York Minister where he showed himself in splendour in 1483.

But he has been in Leicester for 500 years, so maybe that has the superior claim.

Phil H

[Archaic]

Article in the Spectator: "A Ceremony Fit For A King?"

Here's an interesting article that addresses some questions I've been wondering about should the body prove to be Richard III-

not only where he ought to to be reburied, but how a funeral ceremony for a Catholic King of England might be handled by the Anglican powers that be.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2012/09/richard-iii-a-ceremony-fit-for-a-king/

Best regards,
Archaic