This is Leicestershire --Much of the discussion about the reburial of Richard III seems to rest on the premise we are in a position where we can or should rewrite history.
Richard was defeated at Bosworth and buried in Leicester. We now know this to be fact.
Why do some people think we have the right to alter the implications of these events?
Underpinning many of the arguments for reburial in York, or even Westminster, are arguments along the lines of "it's what Richard wanted".
I find this argument carries little weight – Richard stopped being able to get what he wanted when he was defeated at Bosworth.
It was at this point that his own powers of self-determination ended and the forces of history and fate took over.
Richard was brutally thrust from power and had the burial of the defeated because he was.
England then went on to be ruled by the victor at Bosworth, Henry VII. The powerful Tudor dynasty was installed and the course of history had been set.
Unfortunate for Richard, yes, but an occupational hazard of being a monarch at that time.
This was the late medieval period, with values very different from the 21st century, and Richard was sadly but unalterably one of history's losers.
The fact is that Leicester can now provide a perfectly fitting and lasting testimony to these historical events.
He can be buried in our lovely cathedral just metres from his original resting place, with a specially created visitor's centre telling his story.
In the circumstances and in the light of the unfortunate but unalterable course of history, could he really have asked for more?
Unfortunately, I think the real motivation for moving Richard rests on simple snobbery.
I fear that for many people Leicester is simply seen as not good enough to be the resting place of a king.
I disagree, but in any case it is what history decreed. Richard of York gave battle in vain... and was buried in Leicester.
Nigel Underwood, Leicester.
Regarding the claims for the final resting place of Richard III, I would point out the following:
Richard, 3rd Duke of York, and Cecily Neville, his wife, the parents of Richard III, are buried at the church of St Mary and All Saints, Fotheringhay, Northants.
Richard was born in Fotheringhay Castle and the remains of Edward of Norwich, 2nd Duke of York, Richard's great-uncle, who was killed at Agincourt, are also interred in the church.
Edward IV, Richard's brother, and his wife Elizabeth Woodville, together with Anne of York, Richard's sister, and her husband, are buried at St George's Chapel, Windsor.
George, Duke of Clarence, Richard's brother, and his wife Isobel Neville are buried at Tewksbury Abbey.
Anne Neville, the wife of Richard III, was buried in an unmarked grave in Westminster Abbey.
It would seem from the above facts that both Leicester and York have little claim to the rights of burial of Richard III, although Richard did spend some time living in Yorkshire at Middleham Castle and Leicester has had his bones for centuries.
It becomes apparent, to me at least, that the obvious place to lay his bones is St Mary and All Saints, Fotheringhay, where his parents lay and which has a perfect place for a tomb to be built, giving prominence to this much-maligned king of England, which Shakespeare, kowtowing to the Tudors, did little to dispel.
Tony K Topley, Syston.
With regard to the Plantagenet Alliance and its claim to be heirs to Richard III, surely the first things to be resolved in this judicial review is are members of the alliance actually descendants of Richard or are they chancers with one eye on the tourism aspect of this?
Secondly, what right do this chosen few have to bring this action? As I understand it, Richard's descendants number in the millions.
Finally, isn't a successful claim by this bunch of chancers going to open the floodgates for other monarchs to be dug up and reinterred by anybody with one eye on the tourist dollar?
Perhaps the Tower of London will be the next seeking the reinterment of William the Conqueror from his resting place of Abbaye aux Hommes, a former monastery in the French city of Caen, Normandy?
On the grounds he really wanted to be buried in his White Castle. Well, that's what Fred down at the Royal said the other day?
Robert Thomas, Botcheston.
I am writing to support Nic Le Becheur regarding the proposed visitor centre for Richard III ("If we're lucky, council will lose judicial review", Mailbox, August 10).
I entirely agree with him about the tremendous cost.
I also take this opportunity to suggest Sir Peter Soulsby reads Professor AL Rowse's book Bosworth Field and The Wars of The Roses, which is as historically accurate as it can be, drawing on all previous works on the subject.
Would that he was still alive to correct the fantasy that's going on at the present time of airbrushing history to suit the media of today.
Professor Rowse was assisted by Professor Simmonds, of the University of Leicester when researching in Leicestershire.
I am sure Prof Simmonds would also have something to say about the present views – and I did know him.
Fred Lawrence, Market Harborough. Reported by This is 23 hours ago.