Richard III: Monster or Myth?

1481 Words3 Pages

King Richard III was the last Plantagenet king and is doubtlessly one of the most controversial British rulers of the Middle Ages. His reign marked the end of the Wars of the Roses between the Yorkists and the Lancastrians and the beginning of a new myth based not only on his physical appearance but also on this moral. He is depicted as a deformed human being; he is believed to have had a hunchback and his physical description is one of a monster, of a deformed creature. However, this allegation most likely lies on the grounds that he has been an inhumanly cruel and wicked person; a ruthless tyrant who is thought to have murdered and bastardised his two young nephews in the Tower of London, one of which had been crowned to the throne. In order to provide evidence to the accusations levelled at Richard III, archaeologists have conducted numerous excavations to find out whether this portrait of Richard III was real or a mere metaphor to describe his actions. It is just conceivably that this physical representation is based on the Tudor Myth -a myth that initially started by Tudor’s historians such as Polydore Vergir and Sir Thomas More, and perpetuated by Shakespreare’s play Richard III, in which he is also described as an abnormal King.
By the end of the Hundred Years’ War, England was embroiled in civil wars, which became known as the Wars of the Roses. King Henry VI became king as a baby and he was not very warlike; for this reason, he was an unsuitable king for such a violent society. Noblemen were exceedingly powerful and they had their own army to threaten the local people and impose their rules. However, the noble families had different interests and were divided in the ones who supported Henry VI, the so-called ‘Lancastrians...

... middle of paper ...

...worth was fought. In these newspaper articles archaeologists assert that they found a body and that evidence proves that it is Richard’s. However, DNA tests have not been carried out yet, since there is only one great grand-child alive – his other male relatives have been murdered.
Albeit,
All in all, to my way of thinking, Richard's actions and behaviour were the subject of attention and analysis and were presented, after his death, as those of a wicked and immoral tyrant. However, despite the Tudor's attempts to load charges on Richard III, historians now take a balanced approach to avoid either side of the pendulum as the available evidence is not enough to corroborate their claims. His portrait may have been due to his enemy’s plot to call him an inhumanly cruel and wicked person; a ruthless despot, who only longed to achieve his aim–to become King of England.

Open Document