Richard III a Tyrant as King

Richard III a Tyrant as King

Throughout history, this very title has been disputed and the outcome

has remained debatable to this very day.

Richard, Duke of York had remained loyal to his brother, Edward IV

throughout his years of reign, and had been well rewarded for his

support, he became the Duke of Gloucester. In marrying Anne Neville,

daughter of Earl of Warwick, he had inherited mass amounts of Neville

land in the north of England after both the Earl and Anne died. He was

respected within the northern parts of England and provided land for

his friends. He was an able man who showed signs of being an efficient

king amidst the preoccupations of the rebellions, sadly he went about

it the wrong way.

On the death of the king, Edward's eldest son, then only 12 years old,

was proclaimed king as Edward V. It was due to this, with the aid of

Henry Stafford, second duke of Buckingham, Richard seized custody of

the young king and was able to assume the protectorship.

Richard's rise to power has been cloaked with many secrets. One belief

Richard had was that Edward V, his nephew could be swayed by the

Woodville's to their advantage. As Edward V mother had been a

Woodville herself, Elizabeth Woodville, it could be argued that the

Woodville's had a right to influence the King. But Richard eventually

replaced Edward V and was crowned king in July 1483 after claiming the

illegitimacy of Edward IV's son's, but was this idea of his enough to

take the crown. Richard also counter-claimed that as the young Kings

uncle he should be the rightful protector of him.

Perhaps Richard was power hungry and when he saw a chance to take

seize t...

... middle of paper ...

...out a battle of conscience;

Richard refuses to accept he even has a conscience, another sign that

he is rooted in pure evil. Although he collapses mentally the night

before the battle at Bosworth, he finds that he is forced to confront

the reality of something he chose to ignore. It can be argued that

this lack of acceptance led to his downfall.

Richard did show on many occurrences that he was not a tyrant. He was

a normal man with a slight deformity of a humped back. His labour for

religion and to the financial state of England shows this fact.

However Richards route to power does point out a deeper, more

mysterious side to his character. An attribute of the tyrant King is

the seize of the thrown without proper reason or motive. But I do not

believe that Richard III of England was as history makes him out to

be.