This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/richard-iii-leicester-bones-reburial

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Leicester deserves better than the bones of Richard III Leicester deserves better than the bones of Richard III
(about 14 hours later)
Why the hullabaloo over the bones of a king dead for over 500 years, particularly one with such a villainous reputation? The solemn processing of Richard III’s relics around the villages of Leicestershire followed by a grand, archbishop-led reinterment service is reminiscent of the saints’ cults of the middle ages. We haven’t had any cases of bystanders touching the king’s bones to be cured of their ailments, but I’ll be keeping an eye on news websites for reports of miracles in the east Midlands.Why the hullabaloo over the bones of a king dead for over 500 years, particularly one with such a villainous reputation? The solemn processing of Richard III’s relics around the villages of Leicestershire followed by a grand, archbishop-led reinterment service is reminiscent of the saints’ cults of the middle ages. We haven’t had any cases of bystanders touching the king’s bones to be cured of their ailments, but I’ll be keeping an eye on news websites for reports of miracles in the east Midlands.
Leicester worthies argue that this will promote local pride and community cohesion while honouring an unjustly maligned monarch. To sceptics, it may seem more a reboot of the medieval craze for relics, in which battles for the most holy bones and profitable pilgrimage routes no longer take place on crusader battlefields but in the high court (Leicester city council and others spent £250,000 on legal battles to win the right to bury the king).Leicester worthies argue that this will promote local pride and community cohesion while honouring an unjustly maligned monarch. To sceptics, it may seem more a reboot of the medieval craze for relics, in which battles for the most holy bones and profitable pilgrimage routes no longer take place on crusader battlefields but in the high court (Leicester city council and others spent £250,000 on legal battles to win the right to bury the king).
In fact, this is a truly postmodern mashup: one part TV culture (the idea of digging up the bones was once a Time Team project), one part new university-funding systems (20% of research league-table scores are now for public “impact”), and two parts local politics.In fact, this is a truly postmodern mashup: one part TV culture (the idea of digging up the bones was once a Time Team project), one part new university-funding systems (20% of research league-table scores are now for public “impact”), and two parts local politics.
Related: Honour for Richard III, tomorrow Cromwell and James IV? | Letters
It’s entirely understandable that in this overwhelmingly London-centric country, other cities crave a touch of the limelight. But is Richard III really the right symbol for modern Leicester? Its burghers insist that the burial service will be ecumenical, and other faith leaders have been invited. But surely a medieval king is an odd focus for local pride in this youthful, multi-ethnic city. Is a ceremony about a defunct monarch, laden with Christian ritual and attended by a clutch of minor royals, not in danger of projecting a rather exclusive and backward-looking message?It’s entirely understandable that in this overwhelmingly London-centric country, other cities crave a touch of the limelight. But is Richard III really the right symbol for modern Leicester? Its burghers insist that the burial service will be ecumenical, and other faith leaders have been invited. But surely a medieval king is an odd focus for local pride in this youthful, multi-ethnic city. Is a ceremony about a defunct monarch, laden with Christian ritual and attended by a clutch of minor royals, not in danger of projecting a rather exclusive and backward-looking message?
Leicester has several other sons and daughters who would make more effective city standard-bearers. Thomas Cook is undoubtedly the most famous and historically significant. He effectively invented modern tourism, with its travel agents, brochures and package tours. Cook’s 200th anniversary was celebrated in Leicester in 2008, but it was a pretty low-key affair. Surely this hero of peaceful globalisation would be a better icon for the city than a figure whom many historians still regard as a child-killer.Leicester has several other sons and daughters who would make more effective city standard-bearers. Thomas Cook is undoubtedly the most famous and historically significant. He effectively invented modern tourism, with its travel agents, brochures and package tours. Cook’s 200th anniversary was celebrated in Leicester in 2008, but it was a pretty low-key affair. Surely this hero of peaceful globalisation would be a better icon for the city than a figure whom many historians still regard as a child-killer.
Another candidate might be George Fox, the 17th-century founder of the Quakers. This movement’s celebration of religious tolerance and pluralism seems more apt for a 21st-century multi-ethnic city.Another candidate might be George Fox, the 17th-century founder of the Quakers. This movement’s celebration of religious tolerance and pluralism seems more apt for a 21st-century multi-ethnic city.
Yet in contemporary Britain, royals still trump commoners, however worthy and significant. The five-day funeral extravaganza is only one example of a royalty-obsessed culture. The extraordinary popularity of Wolf Hall and the hit play The Audience (with Britain’s finest actresses queuing up to play the Queen) all suggest an unhealthy nostalgia for a very narrow vision of British identity.Yet in contemporary Britain, royals still trump commoners, however worthy and significant. The five-day funeral extravaganza is only one example of a royalty-obsessed culture. The extraordinary popularity of Wolf Hall and the hit play The Audience (with Britain’s finest actresses queuing up to play the Queen) all suggest an unhealthy nostalgia for a very narrow vision of British identity.
This is not just unhelpful in a modern, diverse society; it also perpetuates a counterproductive image of Britain abroad. It may attract tourists and help sell TV costume dramas, but it perpetuates an image of a Ruritanian and fundamentally irrelevant theme-park nation obsessed with its royal past. It’s hard to see why foreigners would look to such a country for hi-tech innovation or industrial dynamism of any variety.This is not just unhelpful in a modern, diverse society; it also perpetuates a counterproductive image of Britain abroad. It may attract tourists and help sell TV costume dramas, but it perpetuates an image of a Ruritanian and fundamentally irrelevant theme-park nation obsessed with its royal past. It’s hard to see why foreigners would look to such a country for hi-tech innovation or industrial dynamism of any variety.
It all seems a very long way from Danny Boyle’s wittily creative engagement with Britain’s past in his 2012 London Olympics pageant.It all seems a very long way from Danny Boyle’s wittily creative engagement with Britain’s past in his 2012 London Olympics pageant.
Far from the country “walking tall”, as George Osborne boasted in his budget speech last week, there is a danger we are limping, hunchbacked, into the global future.Far from the country “walking tall”, as George Osborne boasted in his budget speech last week, there is a danger we are limping, hunchbacked, into the global future.