Richard III and the Stability of England Essay

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.

In my opinion, I believe that when he made the New Model Army, England gained strength, power and

While Richard left England to oversee the progress of his foreign war, Henry and the other nobles began plans to take Richard's kingdom. This was a crucial mistake on Richard's part. By not taking care of issues on the domestic front, Richard's followers and soldiers grew increasingly weary of his ability to lead and be an effective king, eventually siding with Henry. Henry proceeded to capture Bristol Castle, a stronghold of Richard's and began his plans on being ordained future king.

Richard, the main character of the Shakespeare’s play, Richard III is portrayed as socially destructive and politically over-ambitious. His destructive potential is depicted by the way he relates with the other protagonists in the play and also by what he confesses as his intentions.

During the reign of Edward VI, Northumberland and Somerset attempted to rule England. They dealt with several issues, including foreign policy, finance, social and economic affairs, working as political operators and dealing with with rebellions. Northumberland proved to be successful in many of these aspects, particularly in social and economic affairs as well as finance. This is because he was able to effectively correct the faults Somerset had made such as introducing certain taxes and causing debt as well as debasement. This essay will talk about the extent of how successful Northumberland was in comparison to Somerset when it came to ruling England.

According to the article History and Tragedy in Richard II, written by Elliot, he writes “Richard is a failure as a king not because he is immoral, nor because he is too sensitive and refined for the job, but because he misunderstands the nature of kingship (260)”. Richard’s downfall is not all his fault but as a king he should have understood the idea of what a great king needs to do to succeed in the life of royalty.

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.

When Edward came into power in 1042, England was in a poor state financially and also because of threats of an invasion and this made the first few years of his rule difficult. Edward was faced with many problems which he had to overcome. These problems involved; powerful Earls, (especially the Godwine’s), the foreign policy and the domestic policy. Edward both failed and succeeded in these problems due to a number of factors. These include a lack of knowledge about his kingdom and some may argue that he was naïve in his decisions. With some evaluation, we will be able to judge if Edward was a successful King or not.

How has your study of the connections between King Richard III and Looking for Richard deepened your understanding of the context of and values within, each text?

After Edward III died in 1377, England experience domestic issues during the reign of Richard II

Richard III is the story of a villain who will commit unspeakable crimes in order to attain power. However, it is important to remember that it is just that, a story. Shakespeare wrote to entertain, and sometimes in order to captivate an audience, history must be embellished. For example, the events on which the play is based span 14 years, although the runtime of the play seems to suggest that it all took place within a few months. Even though this play is classified as historical, it fits more in the historical fiction genre as Shakespeare bases it on actual events but takes artistic liberties with his characters. In Richard III, due to the political climate of his time, Shakespeare characterizes Richard as ruthless and power hungry in order to paint the Tudor dynasty in a superior light.

Richard’s aspiration for power caused him to sacrifice his morals and loyalties in order to gain the throne of England. Shakespeare refers to the political instability of England, which is evident through the War of the Roses between the Yorks and Lancastrians fighting for the right to rule. In order to educate and entertain the audience of the instability of politics, Shakespeare poses Richard as a caricature of the Vice who is willing to do anything to get what he wants. As a result, the plans Richard executed were unethical, but done with pride and cunningness. Additionally, his physically crippled figure that was, “so lamely and unfashionable, that dogs bark at me as I halt by them,” reflects the deformity and corruption of his soul. The constant fauna imagery of Richard as the boar reflected his greedy nature and emphasises that he has lost his sense of humanity.

Richard the Lionheart ruled as the King of England from the 6th of July in 1189 until his unfortunate death on the 6th of April in 1199. He had ruled as Duke of Normandy, Aquitaine, Gascony, and Cyprus as well. Richard got his nickname from a lion attack when the lion had opened its jaws to bite him he had reached down and pulled its heart out according to folk tales. He was born in the United Kingdom in Oxford on the 8th of September in 1157. According to History Extra (2015), “Richard at the age of only nine was betrothed to a nine-year-old princess, his father Henry had tricked King Louis VII into handing over his daughter, she spent 25 years in prison until she would come of age.” He was a very important figure during the Middle Ages having triumphant victories during the third crusade (1189-1192). Richard was well educated and had quickly demonstrated these impressive military skills. For many years had enforced his father’s laws in their French lands. Later he defeated his father with a successful revolt, overthrowing him as king of England, which had been originally his mother idea. He was able to keep his kingdom under control when he had left for the third Crusade because there had been no attempts of invasions. Therefore, he was an important figure for middle ages and should be remembered today.

A defining feature between these two men’s fate is Richard’s dependence on good fortune through divine intervention, whereas Henry and Machiavelli rely on free will, what they themselves can do to manipulate the situation. Richard calls upon God to defend him, thinking that he can manipulate God’s will to fit his desires, “angels fight, weak men must fall, for heaven still guards the right” (III.ii pg 409) This idea of unearthly abilities that allow him to manipulate nature itself, even England is stupid and shows how incompetent he is. Compared to Henry in this play, he is someone who wants to serve England, not how England can serve them; in other words what you can do for your country. Machiavelli states that “so long as fortune varies, and men stand still, they will prosper while they suit the times, and fail when they do not”, Richard in all ways fills this statement, his reliance on fortune seals his fate in the end (Machiavelli 148). Shakespeare shows this antiquated idea to show how much England needed a change of leadership and rule, the end of medievalism and the rise of Machiavellianism.

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