Which Westerosi King's body gets the parking lot treatment?

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

Robert

[Castellan]

I can picture the lower levels of Winterfell crypts having cave-ins or being closed up and forgotten, only to be dug up 100s of years later by some Stark with a southron education.

[green_caitlin]

I believe the issue under discussion is whose body is likely to be thrown unceremoniously in a hole in the ground, only to be discovered 500 years later under a car park.

I'm a stubborn girl ;) so I'll repeat it: Richard III wasn't 'dumped in some hole', he was buried properly in a church. The building was destroyed centuries later, during the Reformation period. While his corpse was/may have been desecrated after the battle, in the end the enemy showed him some respect... unlike Freys to Robb.

[Pinkie Baelish]

Stannis, considering that he seems to be partially based on Richard III.

[Pompeius Magnus]

I'm a stubborn girl ;) so I'll repeat it: Richard III wasn't 'dumped in some hole', he was buried properly in a church. The building was destroyed centuries later, during the Reformation period. While his corpse was/may have been desecrated after the battle, in the end the enemy showed him some respect... unlike Freys to Robb.

Yes, he was buried in a church... In a hole too small for his body, with neither coffin nor shroud. So yes, they showed some respect, but, y'know, not too much.

[Ponys123]

Stannis fills Richard's position if we draw analogies between Westeros and the Wars of the Roses. No one likes him much, so getting dumped in a random hole in the ground is likely.

[Son of a Harpy]

Going with Stannis.

[Roza Ahai]

Rhaegar. He is also known as a villain.

[Sand Snake No. 9]

I'm a stubborn girl ;) so I'll repeat it: Richard III wasn't 'dumped in some hole', he was buried properly in a church. The building was destroyed centuries later, during the Reformation period. While his corpse was/may have been desecrated after the battle, in the end the enemy showed him some respect... unlike Freys to Robb.

Nude, without shroud or coffin, hands still tied, the grave too small according to some reports so the body was twisted, no known marker or record of the burial -- doesn't sound like a "proper" burial to me. Some contemporary reports agree:

According to the Burgundian chronicler Jean Molinet, writing in 1490,

His horse leapt into a march from which it could not retrieve itself. One of the Welshmen then came after him, and struck him dead with a

halberd

, and another took his body and put it before him on his horse and carried it, hair hanging as one would bear a sheep. And so he who miserably killed numerous people, ended his days iniquitously and filthily in the dirt and mire, and he who had despoiled churches was displayed to the people naked and without any clothing, and without any royal solemnity was buried at the entrance to a village church.

[1]

Polydore Vergil, Henry Tudor's official historian, described how Richard was buried:

The body of King Richard, naked of all clothing, and laid upon a horse's back, with the arms and legs hanging down on both sides, was brought to the abbey of

Franciscan

monks at Leicester, a miserable spectacle in good truth, but not unworthy for the man's life, and there was buried two days after without any pomp or solemn funeral.

[2]

While Tudor commentators aren't exactly objective on the subject of Richard, surely they'd get the details of his Tudor burial right.

After the prior was destroyed after the dissolution of the monasteries there were stories that Richard's bones had been dumped in the river and his coffin used as a horse trough. However the exhumation did not reveal any evidence of a coffin:

It became clear that the leg bones found on the first day lay inside the eastern part of the church, possibly the choir, where Richard III was said to have been buried.^[11] On 31 August, ULAS applied for a licence from the Ministry of Justice to permit the exhumation of up to six sets of human remains. To narrow the search, it was planned that only the remains of males in their 30s, buried within the church, would be exhumed.^[10]

The leg bones found on 25 August were uncovered again on 4 September and the grave soil was dug back further over the next two days. The feet were not present and the skull was found in an unusual propped position resulting from the body having been put into a grave that was slightly too small. No sign of a coffin was found and the body's posture suggested that it had not been put in a shroud, but had simply been hurriedly dumped into the grave and covered over. The spine of the skeleton was found to be curved into a S-shape. As it was lifted from the ground, a piece of rusted iron was found lying underneath the vertebrae.^[12][13] The skeleton's hands were found to be in an unusual position, crossed over the right hip. This suggests that they may have been tied together at the time of burial, though this cannot be established definitively.^[14]

Based on this description, repeated in various news reports, I think I'll stubbornly maintain my position that Richard's body was not buried with respect.

[Castellan]

Nude, without shroud or coffin, hands still tied, the grave too small according to some reports so the body was twisted, no known marker or record of the burial -- doesn't sound like a "proper" burial to me. Some contemporary reports agree:

While Tudor commentators aren't exactly objective on the subject of Richard, surely they'd get the details of his Tudor burial right.

After the prior was destroyed after the dissolution of the monasteries there were stories that Richard's bones had been dumped in the river and his coffin used as a horse trough. However the exhumation did not reveal any evidence of a coffin:

Based on this description, repeated in various news reports, I think I'll stubbornly maintain my position that Richard's body was not buried with respect.

its still in a hole on sacred ground

[Pinkie Baelish]

Nude, without shroud or coffin, hands still tied, the grave too small according to some reports so the body was twisted, no known marker or record of the burial -- doesn't sound like a "proper" burial to me. Some contemporary reports agree:

While Tudor commentators aren't exactly objective on the subject of Richard, surely they'd get the details of his Tudor burial right.

After the prior was destroyed after the dissolution of the monasteries there were stories that Richard's bones had been dumped in the river and his coffin used as a horse trough. However the exhumation did not reveal any evidence of a coffin:

Based on this description, repeated in various news reports, I think I'll stubbornly maintain my position that Richard's body was not buried with respect.

I feel a bit bad for Richard. I don't think he deserved the universal hatred and defamation he received after the Tudors came to power.

I think now that his body has been exhumed, attitudes towards him will change. I won't be surprised if the Brits even have a bit of a nostalgic revival and celebration of Richard. They've done similar things in the past.

[Roza Ahai]

Stannis fills Richard's position if we draw analogies between Westeros and the Wars of the Roses. No one likes him much, so getting dumped in a random hole in the ground is likely.

Actually North England supported and respected Richard. He was a good administrator there during his brother's reign.

[western wolf]

So, if you go forward 500 or so years from ASOIAF, who's body gets dug up in a parking lot?

Robb Stark?

Ned Stark's bones?

???

Stannis.

[Sand Snake No. 9]

its still in a hole on sacred ground

Temporarily sacred ground, at any rate, later to become public toilets and a parking lot.

Stuff like this is why I want to be cremated.

[Bayard]

So, Richard III meant the end of a dynasty, and the beginning of a new one. Sure, he was a king, so he did get a proper funeral, but he was forgotten over time... and lost. For something like this to happen in Westeros, you need again a king that was the last of a dynasty. Aerys or Rhaegar were perfect, but they were cremated so we only have two options left: Tommen or Stannis. Stannis is the rightful king, but he is still only a pretender until he gets the crown or King's Landing, and I think he will never do that. So, Tommen it is.

[Nausicaä]

Rhaegar was cremated, per Targaryen tradition.

ETA: Here's the link to the SSM where GRRM mentions Rhaegar's cremation. It's also confirmed in the WoIaF app.

http://www.westeros..../SSM/Entry/2997

Thank you, that is interesting. OT, but can someone remind me what happened to Viserys' body after he died?

That is true, I think it most likely that the Freys just threw Robb's body in the river or buried somewhere. Perhaps they wanted to mock him further by throwing him in the river to mimic the Tully's funeral customs, as they did with Cat. Keeping the body on display would have been to provocative I think.

You never know with the Freys. I wouldn't at all be surprised if when the armies of the Vale, North and Riverlands crack the Twins open they find mummified and stuffed Robb (with Grey Wind's taxidermied head) seated at the dinner table. Maybe even holding his own head. /grim

[Brienne Of Bombay]

I'd go with Balon Greyjoy..

[Grip]

[....]

You never know with the Freys. I wouldn't at all be surprised if when the armies of the Vale, North and Riverlands crack the Twins open they find mummified and stuffed Robb (with Grey Wind's taxidermied head) seated at the dinner table. Maybe even holding his own head. /grim

Heh that would certainly be the final nail in the coffin for House Frey! Though I doubt they have the courage to keep any remains of their betrayal left, I can imagine that other Lords/Houses would flaunt the evidence of their crimes and not give a damn what people think or what the consequences might be. The Frey's hovewer are to ambitious hovewer, prefering to try and lie to the realm about what happened at the RW (as we see with Rhaegar and Jared Frey in ADWD).

[Nausicaä]

Heh that would certainly be the final nail in the coffin for House Frey! Though I doubt they have the courage to keep any remains of their betrayal left, I can imagine that other Lords/Houses would flaunt the evidence of their crimes and not give a damn what people think or what the consequences might be. The Frey's hovewer are to ambitious hovewer, prefering to try and lie to the realm about what happened at the RW (as we see with Rhaegar and Jared Frey in ADWD).

I think that the Freys in general would be happy to improve their ruined reputation in any way they can and stop it from being ruined further, but I don't know about Walder Frey. To me, he seems like a person who truly doesn't give a damn about the consequences because he most likely will never experience them. He's going to leave his family in ruins because of the betrayal that he orchestrated and because he set it up so that there would be brutal in-fighting for the Twins when he dies. When he dies, his children and grand-children won't have any allies among the other houses or even agreement between themselves. So I don't think he would let thoughts of propriety dictate what he does in his castle because of his concern for the future of his house. I doubt that anyone is staying at the Twins anyway or that many people passed through the castle since the RW.

I definitely think that if Robb's body was thrown into the river, we would have heard about it. I think the Freys either kept it as a trophy or buried it in an unmarked mass grave.

[green_caitlin]

Yes, he was buried in a church... In a hole too small for his body, with neither coffin nor shroud. So yes, they showed some respect, but, y'know, not too much.

Nude, without shroud or coffin, hands still tied, the grave too small according to some reports so the body was twisted, no known marker or record of the burial -- doesn't sound like a "proper" burial to me.

Based on this description, repeated in various news reports, I think I'll stubbornly maintain my position that Richard's body was not buried with respect.

Apologies for not replying for such a long time.

I'll try to be as brief as possible. It was suggested that Richard III had been 'dumped in a ditch', so I wanted to make it clear it hadn't happened. He was buried in the sacred ground. It was important to people then and made a huge difference to them.

As to the question of respect/lack of respect, I was making a comparison between the Lancasters and the Freys. At least the former buried the enemy in accordance with the contemporary customs.

My reply is probably pointless, because I don't think I could persuade anybody to change their mind, but...

Having said that, I disappear before I get killed for going off topic. :)