The Battle for King Richard III

When the remains of King Richard III were dug up by University of Leicester staff in February 2012 not many people would have predicted a high court hearing between two cities claiming rights to his remains. The two cities: Leicester nearby to where the Plantagenet fell at the Battle of Bosworth and York where the king was originally from.

So how has the remains of a king that died over 500 years ago got to this stage and why? Basically York believe as he grew up in York he belongs there and Leicester believe as he fell there he should stay there, as with most things I write about, it's far more complicated than this. The two cities want the remains for one main reasons: tourism. Tourism generates money for that city leaving it in a better financial situation.

Who should keep Richard III's remains, Leicester or York? Picture courtesy of BBC

So which City should it go to? Both cities do have arguments but simply as he fell in Leicester he should stay in Leicester. In medieval times if a king fell in battle the victor would decide where the fallen should be buried. In this case when Richard III was killed at the Battle of Bosworth the victor Henry VII paid for the grave of Richard III to be marked where it was.

When the University of Leicester dug up the remains of the King they invested a lot of money, after that is it fair that York then just take him away for free? In the unlikely event that York do get him then they should pay how much the University of Leicester paid to discover him. York were not interested in finding him they only claim they wanted him when he was found by a team in Leicester - they didn't use their resources up to find him!

York's body arguing the case named The Plantagenet Alliance claim that a lot of distant relatives are still in York and so he should be buried there. A flawed argument; if all of his distant relatives are in York why did they have to use the DNA of a man now living in Canada and from London to see if the body they found was King Richard III?

The remains of Richard III found in a Leicester car park. Picture courtesy of ITV

What is also quite ironic is that yes he was from York but he was Richard of Gloucester since the ago of 8 which is a massive 190 miles away from York - can I also add it is a of a lot closer to Leicester. Not only that but he was born in Northampton which is a neighbouring county to Leicester.

York also argue that Richard wished to be buried in York although when did a beaten king ever get the choice of where they were buried? Like I said earlier in this article when a king is fallen the victor chooses where the fallen is buried.

Another problem York will be facing is petitions, two petitions have gone out by both Leicester and York as to where the king should be buried. Leicester beat York by nearly 3,000 signatures - these petitions have already been announced they will be used as evidence in the judicial review (which has been adjourned for a later date).

Finally possibly the best argument Leicester has it'll be keeping with archaeological practice to keep the remains of the King in Leicester's cathedral. When an archaeological discovery is found in a city that city should keep it.

So when the High Court decide I would be extremely surprised if York get the remains of the king that was found and funded by Leicester.