Richard III Disappearance

However, an argument contradicting this idea lies in the persona of Richard, Duke of York, who was the King’s closest adult male relative and the most famous and influential of the great magnates in 1450. Also before 1453 York was heir presumptive. He was descended from Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York and fourth son of Edward III on his father’s side. On his mother’s side he was descended from Lionel of Clarence, Edward’s second son. York’s close blood relationship to the king could admit him to the throne. Not only did he claim the descent from King Edward III, but also claimed to the throne. The Battle of St. Albans is the straightforward proof of it. He evidently felt that he had a sense of duty and a right to play a fundamental role in government. Richard was an obvious threat to Henry’s kingship: unlike the last one he was a competent politician, a distinct warrior and a father of healthy sons. In other words, his power of personality harmonized his goal, which by 1450s, had come to embrace the crown of England.

These traits that Richard displayed were not befitting to a king and a man who was suppose to lead. Rather than look out for the

Richard’s political ambition is revealed through his strategic calculations based on the order of birth in his York family which puts him third away from the throne. Ahead of him is his elder brother, George Clarence, a barrier which will have to eradicate. His brother, King Edward, is another political barrier, by simply being alive, in power and equally by being the father of the two young princes . Richard’s creates a political mistrust between his two

History is but a series of stories, opinions, and biases that give the world today a glimpse through the window of the past. As it is such, that window is often smudged and smeared because of the many contradicting, differing facets that one moment in history can possess; henceforth figures and details become obscured and lost, thereby creating the many great and fascinating gaps in history that haunt the minds of today’s historians. This paper is an attempt to provide evidence to fill such a gap—the lost story of Edgar Atheling, great half-nephew of King Edward the Confessor of England; also to provide an answer to the puzzling question of why Edgar was never killed by King William I (William the Conqueror, also Duke of Normandy).

It is only during his deposition and his imprisonment that Richard shows his greatest strength as a dramatic figure. Although occasionally he seems to demonstrate self-pity, he also reveals himself to have an acute awareness of the ironies and absurdities in the structure of power of his kingdom. He still compels the court to reconsider his initial claim that the crown is divinely appointed: “Not all the water… can wash the balm of an anointed king (3.2.55)”. Although he keeps reminding those present of his God-given mandate to rule, he seems also to take pleasure in passing on the trails of kingship to his successor. As a King, He does have a God-given position of being the king. But as a king one should know the difference between moral values and ethics values. Just because Richard is King and is appointed by God doesn’t give him any rights to be an awful ruler. He can’t always fight a problem by saying that he is

Since Richard cannot do anything about his deformity and ugliness he turns his bitterness to ambition and lays the groundwork for his plan to betray King Edward IV. Richard tells the audience, “plots have I laid, inductions dangerous, by drunken prophecies, libels and dreams, to set my brother Clarence and the King in deadly hate against the other; and if King Edward be as true and just as I am subtle, false, and treacherous, this day should Clarence closely be mewed up, about a prophecy, which says that G OF Edward’s heirs the murderer shall be” (1.1.32-40). In these lines, Richard reveals his plan that he will turn Clarence and King Edward against each other so Edward will banish Clarence to the tower because he believes Clarence will be his murderer. Richard will do this through declaring a prophecy that this will be so. Richard explains that this will work because King Edward is as just as Richard is treacherous and Richard will use that against King Edward to cause his and Clarence’s demise. It is not known whether the character Richard would have revealed more about his plan this early in the play because he is interrupted by Clarence. Richard ends the speech with the lines, “dive thoughts down to my soul, here Clarence comes” (1.1.41), which basically means that he better keep

Richard I reigned over England during the Middle Ages from 1189 to 1199 with great bravery and immense courage. Richard was born as the third legitimate son of King Henry II of England and never assumed that he would ever ascend to become the king. After leading his country in the Third Crusade, he gained the nicknames “the lionhearted” and “the absent king.” Through many heroic deeds while away at war, he deserved the nickname of “The Lionhearted” the most.

It was a normal day in the castle of Goranson. All the townspeople were tending to their work when an explosion made a loud sound that ran throughout the castle. Townspeople stood there shocked as the castle stood in silence. After the seconds of silence another loud explosion shook the castle followed by arrows flying throughout the castle and vikings screaming as they charge in. Everyone ran to get to safety and the vikings never followed. They only had one mission, to get the king and destroy the castle. When all the noise had stopped and all the screams were silenced the townspeople went to look outside to see that the castle was all burnt down. One farmer had said “Quick find the king”. They all rushed into various buildings only to find the king was not there.

King Henry IV must also contend with his son, Prince Hal, who’s not the honorable prince he had hoped him to be. He feels it is “an honorable spoil” not to have “a son who is the theme of honor’s tongue,” when he learns of Northumberland’s son Hotspur’s victories, which, should be “a conquest for a prince to boast of” (1.1.74,80, & 76). Pangs of jealousy strike Henry’s heart caused by the differences between his son and Northumberland’s. So much so, he wishes “it could be proved that” someone, or something, “had exchanged in cradle clothes, their sons at birth” (1.1.85-87).

Shakespeare used the physical deformities and the gray areas of history to create one of the most well known villains of all time. Shakespeare’s play, Richard III, is the leading voice in the Richard III story. He is portrayed as an ugly villain, an image that is fueling the way people think, talk and reference Richard III. In reality he differed as a person, but many mysteries remain unsolved. The murder of the princes in the tower at the hand of Richard III is still undecided. In more recent terms we are able to see what he actually looked like and if his physical appearance played the role it did in real life. Richard III is an unloved king by many people even though we base most of our assumptions on a play.

conclusion the King had murdered his father, he planned for revenge, but acting it out came very

Throughout my comparative study of texts and context, I have explored various connections shared between William Shakespeare’s ‘Richard the 3rd’ and Al Pacino’s ‘Looking for Richard’. As both of these items are based on the same character, King Richard the 3rd, they share a lot in common. The connection that I have chosen to concentrate on though is the idea of power, and how both texts explore this theme.

Richard was the third son of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine, and he was given the duchy of Aquitaine, his mother’s inheritance, at the age of 11 and was enthroned as duke at Poitiers in 1172. Richard possessed precocious political and military ability, he won fame for his knightly prowess, and quickly learned how to control the

On January 1st of 1649, the Rump Parliament of England passed a mandate for the trial of King Charles I to which he would be charged with “subverting the fundamental laws and liberties of the nation while maliciously making war on the parliament and people of England.” After years of civil war and various failures in fulfilling kingly duties, Charles faced a trial against a strategically assembled English court that would choose his fate. This stands out in history as one of the most noteworthy and dramatic events in early modern England- a domestic political crisis unlike anything that had ever been seen before. Over the years historians have debated in how they characterize the king’s trial and its end result, referring to the execution as “a crime of the worst magnitude, a regrettable necessity, or a laudable challenge to either an individual ruler or the entire political system.” Due to the overall disapproval of the trial by prominent individuals, biased personnel assembled in the court, questionable legal legitimacy, improper court proceedings and unfortunate socio-economic circumstances during his reign, it can be concluded that King Charles I did not receive a fair trial.

Richard II is an authoritative and greedy king of England, and he is living in a period of transition that medieval knights who are swearing total loyalty to a king has been disappearing and an aristocracy starts to gain a power for their own good. However, Richard II keeps believing the power of kingship, and he also is too confident himself. He overestimates his authority and power; furthermore, he ignores the periodical change. Therefore, he speaks confidently how firm his position as king is to the people in Wales, but his attitude changes when he suffers a defeat by Henry Bolingbroke that he