• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent was Richard III responsible for his insecurity as King?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To what extent was Richard III responsible for his insecurity as King? Richard III is one of the most controversial monarchs who history has seen fit to label a monstrous villain. Most of this is due to Shakespeare?s play ?Richard III? who portrayed him as evil personified as well as the Tudor propaganda, which has influenced our perception of him. There have been many historians, who are dedicated to clearing his name, yet in the reverse many propose to expose his vicious crimes. However, of how much of his insecurity was his own fault. Was Richard III completely to blame for the outcome of controversy to his name! Richard is probably best well known for the rumours about his involvement in the killing of the two princes ? his nephews. He declared the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville illegitimate and said that their two sons (heir to the throne) were ?bastards? before taking the throne for himself and murdering the boys. Much like 21st century the killing of children is greatly condemned and by doing this made him unpopular as a king. He made a serious error carrying out this plot and had little hope of holding onto the crown after his actions. ...read more.

Middle

It showed those around him that didn?t have the backing or the power to be able to stop the over-mighty subject. Again, this was only the fault of Richard himself. He gave Buckingham the power and literally set him up to be able to enforce a rebellion. Buckingham knew that Richard was in debt to him and could therefore push to get what he wanted knowing the king would not try to stop him. If Richard had been more forceful in dealing with this powerful noble it may have restored him some success. On the other hand, Richard had many strengths that aided him in reducing the amount of insecurity he had as king. During his reign Richard proved to be a capable and energetic king. In politics and government he was determined to stamp his authority on the kingdom by promising to outlaw corruption, restore peace and reform the legal system. By doing this he showed that he was putting in place actions which would make his country a better place ? this would have definitely got him a lot of credit. He also participated in government and moved around the kingdom to show himself to his subjects. ...read more.

Conclusion

Richard also took time to build amazingly structured halls, chapels and buildings. The way in which he embraced religion sent of a good message to his people ? it allowed them to look at him in a different light. By being accepted by the church and its followers gave Richard a guarded, strong support system as religion was a very powerful source! Overall, Richard did have a great input on his insecurities yet he did do many successful things, which helped to counteract them. Taking drastic measures, like killing the heir to the throne/his own nephews, meant that he lost A LOT of backing. Not only this but Henry Tudor and his foreign relations also aided him into feeling more insecure. Richard?s main problem was that he did not have a good following and this gave him great doubt and weakness throughout his reign. On the positive side he was an active outgoing king, with little opposition, yet he greatly lacked following (through his own fault) which diminished all value of his good deeds. If he had have had assistance from his people, doubled with his success, he could have been a great king! ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. How effective was Richard III as King of England?

    He was not like because of his greatest limitation- his usurpation, which shadows all of his actions. He did not have a good relationship with his Nobles and his death is testimony to failure of his relationship with ay least one of his magnates.

  2. What kind of king does Shakespeare create in Act 3 Scenes 1 and 2? ...

    Henry as wanting his men to know that if they die fighting it was for a just cause. Here Henry illustrates assurance and understanding in his cause for war, his overall audacity and conviction the play is what makes him such a good king.

  1. Discuss Shakespeare's presentation of women in Richard III. Are they convincing characters?

    We first hear of Elizabeth in Act 1 Scene 1, mentioned by Richard to Clarence. The portrayal of her and her family is negative. Richard insults her by not giving her the title she deserves: 'My Lady Grey, his wife, Clarence, 'tis she/ That tempts him to this harsh extremity.'

  2. How effective was Richard III as a king from 1483 - 1485?

    The situation was worsened after the death of Louis XI because a situation similar to that before Richard's usurpation had arisen. The French Government did not want noblemen attempting usurpations after being in contact with Richard III, so shut down relations further.

  1. Henry II (1154 - 1189) is generally seen as the main catalyst in the ...

    Furthermore, it meant that the accused were often brought before the "General Eyre'50 when it arrived in the area. However, in matters regarding civil issues, a new civil remedy called the 'Assize of Novel Disseisin'51 offered persons complaining that their lands had been unfairly or wrongly seized.

  2. Discuss the relationship between Richard II and its source 'How kyng Richarde the seconde....'

    Richard is 'shown' as well as 'told' which, particularly during the first two Acts, results in conflicting impressions of him. In Act 1 Scene 1, he appears as the regal, 'impartial' (1.1.115) king, 'not born to sue, but to command' (1.1.196).

  1. How far & to what extent was Louis responsible for the turn of events ...

    Furthermore, Louis had seemed to support constitutional government by supporting the colonists. Tracts like 'What is the third estate?' attacked the Ancien regime whereby the third estate paid the taxes but got no representation in offices. Equally, pamphlets like 'The rights of man' by Tom Paine, demanded equality for all.

  2. This essay examines the actions of Charles VII in relation to events pertaining to ...

    Charles was in the midst of negotiating peace with the Duke of Burgundy, thus he might have been trying to avoid taking actions which would aggravate the Duke. Even so, Charles owed much of his success to Joan therefore the process of his acquisition of the throne, and his means of securing, it was being questioned.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work