Royal Funerals

Sigismund I (1 I1467-1 IV 1548), grand duke of Lithuania from 1506, king of Poland from 1507, was from the end of the 1520s frequently afflicted by diseases; which made it difficult for him to fulfil his royal duties. This is said to be the reason why more and more decisions were taken by Queen Bona. But until the end of his life the king kept control over the fundamental matters of the state. The political role of his son, Sigismund Augustus (1520-1572), kept increasing from the 1540s; crowned as early as 1530, the young prince took over the governance of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1544. Sigismund I died in his residence on Wawel hill in Cracow on Easter Day at the age of 81. One of the most comprehensive accounts of the king's death is the speech made at the funeral (July 26, 1548) by Samuel Maciejowski, the truthfulness of which is confirmed by epistolary accounts, two of which (the letters of Queen Bona and Jan B. Solfa) are annexed to the study. Sigismund I's piety was shaped in his young years under the influence of the royal family's religious traditions and practices. Religion was a profound personal experience for the king, as is proved not only by his good knowledge of the Bible, which he read frequently, but also by the text and illuminations of his prayer book, written specially for him. What characterised Sigismund I's religiousness was his worship of Christ's mankind-redeeming sacrifice, whose consequence was eschatological fiducia, a strong belief, almost a certainty, that immediately after his death he would be resurrected and would unite spiritually with Christ. Before his death the king kept repeating the words of St. Paul (Phil. 1:23). He was convinced not only that he would at once unite with Christ but also that he would be able better to understand what was going on in this world. Sigismund I's religiousness was marked by traits of late medieval spirituality (devotio moderna) and some elements of magical thinking. It assumed its final shape about the middle of the 1530s under the influence of Erasmus. The nature of the king's faith is reflected in his sepulchral monument and inscriptions in the Sigismund chapel. This has induced scholars to express the view that the king had an influence on the interior decorations of the chapel and that he must have had contact with the concepts of Marsilio Ficino's Florentine neo-Platonism. But the influence of neo-Platonism on the king's intellect and religious views has been overvalued. The sepulchral monument presents the king's body in movement, probably at the moment when he awakes and rises from the dream of death to a new life; the inscriptions on the inner friezes say that kings are sure to be redeemed and that those who die in Christ will enjoy happiness after death. Sigismund I died in full consciousness, ideally fulfilling all the recommendations of ars bene moriendi, including the gift of tears (gratia lachrimarum), particularly valued by theoreticians as proof of deep faith, and of repentance, recommended to a dying man; he felt authentic sorrow (compassio) for the martyrised Christ; he also could bid farewell to his attendants and forgive and biless those who had sinned against him. An analysis of the accounts of the king's death allows us to get an insight into the complex spirituality of humanism during the Reformation and shows the specific characteristics of a religiousness which, while keeping within the doctrine and ritual of the Roman Church, included elements close to the doctrines of the Reformation, as regards redemption and salvation; however, this does not mean that the king was a Nicodemite or a crypto-Lutheran. Sigismund I's bedroom in the Wawel Royal Castle was most likely on the first floor in the room now called Alchemia; it was there that he lay in state, first in the bed of state and then in the coffin, until the funeral. The letter of the king's physician, Jan Benedictus Solfa, to the Bishop of Warmia Jan Dantyszek, Sigismund I's diplomat and poet (first item in the Anex), deserves attention for two reasons. It quotes the king's last words which reflect the ruler's fiducia-permeated eschatological views. It is also a valuable testimony to the intellectual and theological dilemmas of the humanistic élites, which sought inspiration direct in the source of the revelation: the Bible and the epistles of the Fathers of the Church. It also shows the quality and scale of the intellectual ferment sown by Erasmus, who maintained close contacts with the intellectuals of Cracow. Queen Bona's letter to her daughter Izabella, queen of Hungary, written in Cracow on April 2, 1548 (second item in the Annex) contains a valuable description of the king's attire in the coffin, identical with his coronation robes, and of the laudatory text on a plaque placed in the coffin.

Alexander of Medicis, first duke of Florence, was killed in 1537. His widow was Margaret of Austria, daughter of the emperor Charles V, who ordered to celebrate a funeral for the dead duke in the spanish city of Valladolid, where his imperial court was. This act was used as a symbol of the Habsburg power in the Tuscany area.

La finalidad de este trabajo es estudiar las circunstancias de la muerte del príncipe don Juan, los ritos post mortem y las ceremonias fúnebres que tuvieron lugar en Córdoba y Sevilla. Además, nos hemos detenido a analizar cómo pudieron transcurrir los primeros años de su vida y su adolescencia, ya que los testimonios consultados revelan una salud frágil, que, probablemente, pudo precipitar su temprano fallecimiento. Las numerosas fuentes a las que hemos tenido acceso nos han permitido obtener datos inéditos sobre el ceremonial funerario, las manifestaciones de duelo y el volumen de gastos al que tuvieron que hacer frente los concejos de Córdoba y Sevilla para despedir, como la ocasión merecía, al príncipe heredero.

This paper was presented at Kings & Queens 4, in Lisbon, Portugal, 26 June 2015.

The second half of the fifteenth century in England was marked by several dynastic shifts. First, the House of Lancaster gave way to the House of York, when Edward IV permanently won his crown in 1471; as early as 1461, Edward IV referred to Henry VI and his forebears as ―kings by fact, not by law.The Lancastrian king was treated as such at his funeral in 1471. Second, the House of York suffered a split when Richard III declared his brother Edward IV‘s marriage invalid and his children illegitimate in 1483. Richard III made an effort to reconcile himself with the legacy of Henry VI by reburying him at Windsor. During Richard‘s reign, Edward V, like many royal bastards, disappeared. With the third shift, from the House of York to the House of Tudor, Henry VII, victor at Bosworth Field, declared Richard III and his reign invalid in 1485. The circumstances of Richard III‘s burial have now become famous in recent years. Because of these shifts in power, Henry VI and Richard III underwent changes in status which affected their funerals and later reburials. This paper will discuss the differences in the lives and deaths of these kings death compared to other royal exequies, particularly those of Edward II and Richard II. The problem of Edward V is unique among English kings: after being declared a bastard, the boy king was restored to legitimacy alongside his sister Elizabeth, Henry VII‘s betrothed. But this created a problem for both Henry VII and historians: how can a king be laid to rest without a body?