I absolutely agree with Andrew Roberts, a state funeral for Richard III would “offer a superb opportunity to reconnect this country with its past”.
I’m not sure where the reburial should take place. Andrew Roberts argues strongly for Westminster Abbey,
Richard III deserves a burial ceremony in accordance with his former status.That means Westminster Abbey, where 17 English kings and queens are buried.
Richard III was anointed and crowned King at a grand, solemn and very well-attended ceremony at Westminster Abbey on July 6 1483, and he should be buried there with all the proper honours this summer, 530 years later.
The day before the 1483 coronation, the King and his wife, Anne Neville, rode from the Tower of London through the cheering crowds to Westminster. Showing their humility to God, on the day of ceremony they walked barefoot from Whitehall to Westminster Hall (in our present-day Parliament) and then on to the Abbey.
Westminster Abbey is also where Richard’s wife Anne Neville was buried in March 1485, five months before Richard’s own death, after falling ill from tuberculosis. He is said to have cried at her funeral — a burial at the Abbey would reunite them after 528 years.
Seems like a strong historical argument for burial at Westminster Abbey. Meanwhile, there’s a rather unseemly battle between York Minster and Leicester Cathedral for his remains. I can understand the rather legalistic view of Leicester that the exhumation licence was for reburial at Leicester Cathedral. I am seriously tempted by the plea from York for burial in York Minster. Richard III was a Yorkist King, and it would fit neatly into a historical narrative.