Richard III returns to Bosworth Field for final time - Telegraph The Royal Family Richard III returns to Bosworth Field for final time Richard III is given a more dignified entrance to Leicester as his body returns from battle site of Bosworth Field By Sarah Knapton , Science Editor 11:20AM GMT 22 Mar 2015 Follow The last time Richard III was at Bosworth Field the outcome proved less than satisfactory for the King. The battle, which was the last significant skirmish in the War of the Roses, saw Richard not only lose the English throne but also his life. Interior of Leicester Cathedral (Stuart Crump / Alamy) According to contemporaneous accounts, the dead monarch was stripped naked, slung over a horse and led back to Leicester, his skull banging against Bow Bridge as it was brought into the city. He was the last English king to die in battle. Today Richard will have a more dignified entrance to Leicester when his body returns in ceremony within a custom-made coffin, borne on a gun carriage. Before entering the city the King’s remains will travel back to the Leicestershire battlefield for one last time for a special service atop Ambion Hill ahead of his interment at Leicester Cathedral on Thursday.

His skeleton, discovered by archaeologists under a council car park in Leicester August 2012, showed the violence of his end. Historian Richard Knox said "We know Richard's body is stripped of its armour. "The accounts of the time say he's not treated very humanely, a halter is thrown around his neck, he's stripped naked, thrown across a horse and led back to Leicester where 'all men may wonder upon him'. "That would have been so it was well known to the populace that Richard was truly dead. "It was about as undignified an exit from a battle as you could possibly imagine." An artist's reconstruction of the fall of Richard III The Battle of Bosworth brought to an end a bloody period of British history. By day's end on August 22, 1485, the last of the Yorkist Plantagenet line was dead, leaving the victor Henry Tudor to be crowned Henry VII. The stage had been set for the battle two years earlier, when Richard III had his nephew and predecessor 12-year-old Edward V placed in the Tower of London along with his younger brother Richard.

His actions brought a new threat from the House of Lancaster, this time from Henry Tudor, then in exile in France. After an aborted first invasion attempt, Henry managed to land a small force in Wales and intended to march on London but was blocked at Bosworth by Richard’s forces. The site of Bosworth Field today Mr Knox said the king "was a seasoned soldier and had fought at Barnet and Tewkesbury, so he knew about battles". "He had some good commanders with him, and a large well-equipped army - up to 10,000 men on the field," added Mr Knox. "He had guns, and he would have had mounted knights, footsoldiers and archers." • Richard III: we're burying the wrong body Despite outnumbering Henry, it was the Tudor challenger who proved victorious. The King suffered several wounds, including eight to his head, which experts believe shows he may have lost his helmet on the battlefield allowing the fatal wounds to be inflicted. Legend then tells how Henry was handed Richard's crown on the battlefield, after the circlet was found in a thorn bush.

A detailed look at how the body was found After being displayed in Leicester, Richard's body was buried in a hastily dug grave in the Greyfriars monastery where it would lie for the next 527 years. The funeral director who has organised the reinterment told how she used to walk across the car park where the King was buried every day as a child. The bones of Richard III were discovered in a Leicester car park Jenny Gilbert, 34, who runs family firm AJ Adkinson and Son, in Oadby, Leicester, said: "It's unbelievable to think I walked over the top of Richard's remains every day at school. "If someone had told me then there was a King of England buried underneath and that I would be put in charge of this funeral I would have told them they were crazy. "It's such an honour to be involved in such a big event.” The commemorations will include a 35-mile procession towards Leicester city centre, followed by a service. The led-lined coffin, which is expected to weigh about 120kg, will proceed in a motorised Jaguar hearse which will include a drive past Bosworth Battlefield where he was killed.

The coffin is 370mm high, 460mm wide, has a base length of 1,830mm and a top length of 1,794mm, and was made by Michael Ibsen, a descendant of Richard. An artist's reconstruction of the coffin Mr Ibsen, a cabinet maker, gave DNA samples to help verify the unearthed bones did belong to Richard. The journey will begin at 1.05pm, but when it eventually reaches the city centre at 4.30pm, the body will be transferred to a horse-drawn gun carriage. It will then be taken on a one-mile looped journey, loosely mirroring the city's borders from when Richard III was alive between 1452 and 1485. At about 5.45pm Richard will be taken into the cathedral by six pallbearers for a short service. The body will then lie in repose in the church for three days before being lowered into a vault in the building after another service on March 26.

Real location of Richard III's Battle of Bosworth found after 500 years | Daily Mail Online comments Dug out of the ground after more than 500 years, this perfectly preserved tiny silver badge has finally pinpointed the exact site of the battle which decided the Wars of the Roses. The 1.5in decoration proved to archaeologists where the Battle of Bosworth had actually taken place and it was in a field a mile from where historians have always believed it happened. The most famous battle of the War of the Roses was fought on August 22, 1485, and famously saw the death of Richard III. It is in this field, where the treeline is, where Richard III is believed to have been killed in battle. The 1.5in boar badge was found there. The king's personal emblem is believed to have been given to one of his knights before their final stand Enlarge Archaeologist Dr Glenn Foard shows today how the badge of the boar led them to pinpoint the battlefield and where the king fell.

'This is almost certainly from a knight in Richard's retinue, who rode with him to his death on that last charge,' he said The marshy ground at Fen Hole where the badge (below) was found. In the 16th century Holinshed Chronicles (top of picture) it refers to 'Betweene both armies there was a great marish then...' The battle ended decades of civil war and was won by the Lancastrians. It paved the way for Henry Tudor to become the first English monarch of the Tudor dynasty. The battle also inspired the scene from Shakespeare's play Richard III when the defeated hunchback king declares: 'A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse'. The current site has a stone to mark the spot where Richard fell. Historians originally thought the battle took place on Ambion Hill, near Sutton Cheney, Leics., and a stone memorial supposedly marks the spot Richard III died. However, debate has raged for centuries over the exact location of the battlefield. How historians previously believed the armies of Henry Tudor and King Richard lined up before the battle commenced WHY WAS THE BATTLE IMPORTANT?

The Battle of Bosworth Field was fought on the morning of August 22, 1485 and marked the end of the War Of The Roses, the 30-year civil war between the houses of York and Lancaster. One of the most important clashes in English history, it saw the death of Richard III, ushered in the Tudor dynasty and gave Shakespeare one of his best known quotations. The leading role has been played by Laurence Olivier (pictured) and Sir Ian McKellen. The battle marked the final confrontation between the Yorkist king Richard III and his challenger Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond and leader of the House of Lancaster. The seeds of Richard's downfall were sown when he seized the throne from his 12-year-old nephew Edward V in 1483. Support for the monarch was further diminished when Edward and his younger brother disappeared and Richard was involved in the death of his wife. Henry laid claim to the throne from across the Channel. Following an unsuccessful attempt to invade England from his base in France, Henry arrived on the coast of Wales on August 1, 1485.

Gathering support as he marched inland, Richard hurriedly mustered troops and intercepted Henry's army south of Market Bosworth in Leicestershire. After Richard's death on the battlefield his rival was crowned King Henry VII and became the first English monarch of the Tudor dynasty, which lasted until 1603. So four years ago the Battlefield's Trust spent £1million excavating dozens of nearby fields in a bid to end the argument once and for all. Last October it was revealed the battlefield was not where it was originally thought - but the location was kept secret for fear of 'night hawkers' raiding the site for treasure. RELATED ARTICLES Share this article Share But today experts revealed the exact location is a field behind Fenn Lane Farm which belongs to an arable farmer. The new location was revealed after archaeologists discovered a hoard of medieval weapons in the field, including the silver white boar badge believed to have been carried by one of Richard's trusted knights. Evidence such as cannon balls - now the largest collection of that date in Europe - and pieces of armour have been used to confirm the site. A 16th-century historian recorded that Richard was 'killed fighting manfully in the thickest press of his enemies'.

Furthermore that he died fighting to the last, not calling out 'A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse', as Shakespeare claimed, but, in the words of a near-contemporary chronicler: 'Treachery, treachery, treachery.' University lecturer Carl Dawson discovered the badge next to a medieval marsh which experts say was the exact location Richard was dragged from his horse and killed. Researchers also found 22 lead shots fired by hand-held guns and from the largest cannon used during the battle. But it was the silver white boar badge - an emblem of Richard III - which proved to be the key in pin-pointing the battlefield. Measuring just 1.5in the badge would almost certainly have been worn by the king's knights during his last stand. Archaeologist Dr Glenn Foard, who led the search for the battlefield, said: 'If we were looking for any artefact at all and if there's any location we might want to find that artefact, then it's the white boar badge of Richard III next to the marsh.

'This is almost certainly from a knight in Richard's retinue, who rode with him to his death on that last charge.' The Battle of Bosworth Visitor Centre, which is a mile away from Fenn Lane Farm, will remain where it is but will lead vistors on a new trail to the battlefield. Richard McKinder, operations manager for the site, said: 'A lot of American battlefields have had to move their interpretation centres because they are actually destroying what they are trying to interpret. 'We are within walking distance of the battlefield therefore they can use us as the main area for interpretation and then go and see the field itself. A depiction of the carnage during the Battle of Bosworth Field by 18th century painter Philip James de Loutherbourg (1740-1812) King Richard III's final moments were quick & brutal | Fox News King Richard III's final moments were quick & brutal Published September 17, 2014 Facebook 0 Twitter 0 Email Print A photograph of Richard III's jaw and face show penetrating injuries to the maxilla, or upper jaw. (Appleby, et al. Perimortem trauma in King Richard III: a skeletal analysis. The Lancet.

Richard III's last moments were likely quick but terrifying, according to a new study of the death wounds of the last king of England to die in battle. The last king of the Plantagenet dynasty faced his death at the Battle of Bosworth Field on Aug. 22, 1485, only two years after ascending the throne. The battle was the deciding clash in the long-running Wars of the Roses, and ended with the establishment of Henry Tudor as the new English monarch. But Richard III's last moments were the stuff of legend alone, as the king's body was lost until September 2012, when archaeologists excavated it from under a parking lot in Leicester, England. Now, a very delayed postmortem examination reveals that of nearly a dozen wounds on Richard's body, only two were likely candidates for the fatal blow. Both were delivered to the back of the head. [ Gallery: The Search for Richard III's Remains (Photos) ] Battle scars The initial analysis of Richard III's skeleton highlighted the king's scoliosis and battle scars, including at least eight wounds on the skull. In the new postmortem, detailed Sept.

16 in the medical journal The Lancet, scientists took a deeper look, recording 11 injuries on Richard's skeleton that occurred around the time of death, including nine injuries to the skull. Three of the skull injuries were "shaving injuries" to the top of the head, said study researcher Sarah Hainsworth, a professor of materials and forensic engineering at the University of Leicester. These shallow, glancing blows would have sliced the scalp and shaved the skull bone. They would have bled heavily, but would not have been fatal unless untreated. Notably, patterns of striations in the wounds revealed the same weapon probably created these injuries, Hainsworth told Live Science. [ See Images of King Richard III's Battle Injuries ] "If you took a block of cheese into your kitchen and used a serrated blade to cut it, you would see these marks that are characteristic of the blade," she said. Those marks are very similar across the three skull wounds. But Richard III was almost certainly brought down by more than one man and more than one weapon. A knife or dagger likely left a 0.4-inch-long linear wound on his right lower jaw; he also had a penetrating dagger wound to his right cheek.

A keyhole-shaped injury to the top of his head was almost certainly caused by a rondel dagger, a needlelike blade often used in the late Middle Ages. That wound would have caused both internal and external bleeding, but would not have been immediately fatal. The deathblows likely came from a sword or a bill or halberd, which were bladed weapons on poles often used on the battlefield. At the base of Richard III's skull, researchers found two wounds, one 2.4 by 2.2 inches and one 1.21 by 0.67 inches. This wound was in line with another, about 4 inches away on the internal wall of the skull, as well as in line with damage to the top vertebrae. In other words, it appears that the blade entered the head, sliced through the brain and hit the opposite side of the skull. [ See Infographic of Richard III's Battle Wounds ] The postmortem also revealed two wounds to Richard III's body. One, likely delivered as a blow from behind with a fine-edged dagger, damaged the right 10th rib.

Another, a 1.2-inch-long scrape to the pelvis, delivered through the right buttock, had the potential to be fatal. But that wound was almost certainly delivered after death, Hainsworth said, because Richard III was wearing armor on the battlefield that would have protected him. Interpreting trauma on a 500-year-old skeleton is difficult, because soft tissue is missing, Heather Bonney, a human remains researcher at the Natural History Museum, London, who was not involved in the research, said in a statement. However, Bonney said, the findings provide a "compelling account" of Richard III's death. Last moments Either of the penetrating head wounds would have been fatal very quickly, Hainsworth said. The findings mesh with near-contemporary accounts of the battle, which hold that Richard III's horse had become mired in mud, forcing him to dismount. He had either removed or lost his helmet, leaving his head and face vulnerable. "He was surrounded, probably by a number of people with medieval arms," Hainsworth said.

"He was a warrior, he was a knight, he was a trained fighter, but he would have seen other people die on the battlefield, so he would be very aware of, if you like, what was in store for him." The researchers can't say for sure in what order the wounds were delivered, but historical accounts hold that Richard was kneeling with his head bent forward when the fatal wounds were delivered a tale consistent with the large wounds to the base of the skull. Richard's face was actually less mutilated than many battle casualties of the time, Hainsworth said. The choice to spare his face was likely deliberate, she said, as the victors would want to leave no doubt that it was really Richard they had killed. After death, Richard's body was stripped of armor and slung over a horse to be taken to Leicester for public display. It was then, Hainsworth said, that the wounds to the back and buttock were likely made as a final humiliation to the defeated king. "It would have probably been quite quick," Hainsworth said of Richard III's death. "But, I would imagine, nonetheless quite frightening." Copyright 2014 LiveScience , a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Richard III's last battle: New 'War of the Roses' over royal remains? - CNN.com Richard III's last battle: New 'War of the Roses' over royal remains? By Bryony Jones, CNN Updated 1:17 PM ET, Thu September 5, 2013 Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what's happening in the world as it unfolds. JUST WATCHED Richard III's last battle 02:17 Story highlights Remains of Richard III, last English king to die in battle, excavated exactly a year ago Rediscovery of long-lost skeleton was greeted with elation by history enthusiasts Battle now raging over where bones will be reburied; Leicester or York are likely sites Judge in the case warns sides against waging undignified "War of the Roses 2" A year ago, historians held their breath as archaeologist Jo Appleby painstakingly dusted centuries of dirt and debris from the curved spine and staved-in skull of a skeleton uncovered under a parking lot in the English city of Leicester.

The story of the long-lost king buried beneath a car park made headlines around the world -- but 12 months on, excitement has given way to anger, as enthusiasts and experts argue over what should happen to Richard III's remains. The once-missing monarch -- best known as the Shakespearean villain accused of murdering his nephews, the Princes in the Tower, to take the throne -- faces one final battle before he can be left to rest in peace: the increasingly bitter fight over where his bones (minus his feet, lost at some point during the past 500 years) will be interred. The judge in the case, Mr. Justice Haddon-Cave has even gone so far as to plead with all concerned "to avoid embarking on the (legal) Wars of the Roses, part two," warning that such legal wrangling would be "unseemly, undignified and unedifying," and urging them to call in an independent panel of experts to rule on the burial. The original War of the Roses was a bloody civil war which divided England for decades, and eventually saw Richard's family, the Plantagenets , swept from power.

While the experts who carried out the search for Richard III's remains are keen to see him reinterred in Leicester, others believe it was the medieval king's wish to be buried in York -- the city they claim was closest to his heart. English rules and regulations governing exhumations should mean that the decision is a straightforward one -- such bodies are usually reburied in the nearest consecrated ground to the archaeological dig site -- but in fact it is proving anything but, with the launch of legal action to try and halt the plans. Photos: The remains of King Richard III Photos: The remains of King Richard III In 2012, experts began digging away at the area and established that it was part of the friary and that a skeleton, hastily buried in an uneven grave, was that of King Richard III, who was killed in 1485 during the Battle of Bosworth Field. Hide Caption Read more: Richard III had worms, scientists say Those behind the project had always planned for any bodies they uncovered in their search for Leicester's long-lost Greyfriars Friary to be reburied at the city's cathedral, just a stone's throw away from the now-famous car park.

Back then Richard Buckley, lead archaeologist on what he admits to initially thinking of as a "harebrained scheme," told CNN how he had applied for a license to exhume any human remains with the words "In the unlikely event that we find the remains of Richard III..." But it is this very license that now finds itself at the center of a court battle between the authorities in Leicester and a group calling itself the Plantagenet Alliance , who say more thought should have gone into the reburial. The Alliance -- made up of people who claim to be distantly related to Richard III, and headed by Stephen Nicolay, his 17th great nephew -- objects to the lack of consultation over where the newly-rediscovered king's bones should be laid to rest. They say that given the remains' royal status, it should not be a simple case of "finders keepers." Instead, they believe that the location of the new grave should be up for discussion. "What we're saying is that for a significant historical figure such as Richard III, his remains should be the subject of a broad consultation," explains Matthew Howarth, the lawyer representing the Alliance .

"All the interested parties should be able to have their say, state their case as to where the bones should be buried... It shouldn't be a closed decision." JUST WATCHED The Alliance eventually wants to see the bones taken to York, a northern city packed to the gills with historic sites and, the group says, with links to Richard III. It is a plea backed up by others in the city. "Richard was the last northern king," explains Paul Toy, of York's Richard III Museum . "He had lots of estates and he was constantly moving around, but certainly he would identify himself as northern, and York was a city that was very close to his heart... He was very much part of the civic fabric." By contrast, say the "Yorkists," the ill-fated monarch had little or no connection to Leicester -- other than the fact he was slung into a hastily-dug grave there following his death at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. Not true, say those in the Leicester camp. "There's considerable historical evidence that Richard spent quite a lot of time at his castle here in Leicester," says the city's mayor, Peter Soulsby.

"It was from Leicester that he chose to ride out to what would prove to be his last battle, and it was to Leicester that he was returned, and where he was buried on the orders of the new king, Henry. "And frankly, to be buried by royal command in a city is pretty powerful evidence that this is where he ought to remain." Read more: Is this the face that launched 1,000 myths? Soulsby insists that the events of more recent times offer all the more reason for the monarch to be laid to rest in Leicester. "Leicester's people have honored Richard for many generations: We have a King Richard's Road, a King Richard's School, we even have pubs called after King Richard. "It's not just the history that compels us -- it is also the fact that it was the amazing skill of Leicester University 's archaeologists that actually rediscovered the remains, and their incredible forensic work that confirmed they were the remains of King Richard.

"Leicester is where he's been for 500 years, and Leicester is where he deserves to be reburied, with proper ceremony, and in a tomb fit for a king." Indeed, the city is speeding full-steam ahead with plans for a new tomb in the cathedral , where a memorial stone has long paid tribute to the last Plantagenet king, and for a visitor center on the site of the Greyfriars car park, telling the story of Richard's life, his death, and his rediscovery. The council has already bought an old school which is being turned into a museum, and it is clear that there is a commercial aspect to the battle for the bones, since whichever city they end up in is likely to see a tourism boost. Read more: Body found in car park is Richard III Granting a judicial review of the case, Haddon-Cave noted that "the benefit in terms of prestige and increased tourism... is obvious.

It is said that the foot-fall at Leicester Cathedral has increased 20-fold since the discovery." Sitting in a quiet corner of the Cathedral Close with his wife Julia, waiting for a tour to begin, Leicestershire local -- but Yorkshire native -- Peter Farnworth believes that's another reason why the bones should stay close to where they were found. "York has oodles and oodles of tourist attractions," he explained. "Leicester doesn't have many, and if it loses Richard, it will have one less." The Plantagenet Alliance , though, insist that money has nothing to do with their case. "My clients have no commercial interest in it," says Howarth. "They won't gain out of any tourism, but they have a very strong view that Richard's links to the north of England, and to York in particular, mean that he should be buried here." For Toy, it comes down to the question of what the king himself would have wanted. "As far as we can tell, as far as we have any idea of where he wanted to be buried himself, it seems to be in York," he told CNN.

"There's a sense that Richard III is a king who has had a bad press -- an unfair bad press -- and that responding as far as we can to his known wishes would slightly even things up a bit." Richard III dig: Grim clues to the death of a king - BBC News BBC News Richard III dig: Grim clues to the death of a king By Greig Watson BBC News 4 February 2013 Read more about sharing. Close share panel Image caption The decisive act: Richard III leads a charge of his knights in an attempt to kill rival Henry Tudor and, despite getting close enough to strike down Henry's standard bearer, became surrounded moments later If you know a quotation from Shakespeare's Richard III, chances are it is the king's last, desperate plea to escape his fate. But the writer's imagination aside, the discovery of his skeleton beneath a Leicester car park - combined with historical research and weapons analysis - means we now are closer to the grisly truth. And that truth combines heroic chivalry with the most visceral realities of medieval hand-to-hand combat. Despite being one of the most pivotal events in English history, reliable accounts of the Battle of Bosworth in general, and Richard's death in particular, are patchy.

However, what information the chronicles do provide tells an extraordinary story. Image caption The major wounds are to the base of the skull, either side of the spine, and would have been caused by heavy bladed weapons On 22 August 1485, Richard met his rival Henry Tudor - the soon-to-be Henry VII - in fields near Market Bosworth in Leicestershire. Most sources agree Richard's army was larger, but it failed to sweep his enemy from the field. Dr Steven Gunn, a fellow in modern history at Merton College, Oxford, said Tudor historian Polydore Vergil wrote a vivid account of Richard's next, extraordinary, move. The Battle of Bosworth Field England's 118-year period of Tudor rule began in a field in Leicestershire on 22 August, 1485 Nobleman and Lancastrian Henry Tudor (pictured) had returned from 14 years of exile in France, determined to claim the throne His forces defeated a royal army about twice its size, killing Richard III on the battlefield The battle is considered one of the most influential fought on English soil and was famously dramatised by Shakespeare Listen: What happened at the Battle of Bosworth field?

He explained: "He says spies told Richard that Henry was riding with a small number of men, so when he sees this, Richard leads a charge straight at him. "He then goes on to say: 'In the first charge Richard killed several men; toppled Henry's standard, along with the standard-bearer William Brandon; contended with John Cheney, a man of surpassing bravery, who stood in his way, and thrust him to the ground with great force; and made a path for himself through the press of steel.' "Richard is then surrounded by enemy troops but Vergil only says he was killed 'fighting in the thickest of the press'. "More detail comes from a Burgundian historian Jean Molinet, who describes Richard's horse becoming stuck in a marsh and then 'unhorsed and overpowered, the king was hacked to death by Welsh soldiers'." When the discovery of the bones was announced, it was confirmed they showed signs of major head trauma. After more than four months of study, the research team has drawn its first conclusions. Of 10 injuries visible on the skeleton there are eight on the skull alone.

University of Leicester osteo-archaeologist, Dr Jo Appleby said the most obvious damage was at the back of the skull. "The appearance of this injury is typical of an attack with a large-bladed weapon which was sufficiently sharp to slice off a large area of bone from near the base of the skull. "Although we cannot identify the specific weapon that caused this injury, it would be consistent with a halberd or similar weapon. Image caption A boar badge - the symbol of Richard's household - was found at Bosworth and may mark his final stand "This wound is likely to have been fatal, although that would have depended on exactly how far the blade penetrated into the brain." A second wound on the other side of the spine indicates where a blade was forced deep into the skull. Another wound had taken a small chunk out of the top of the head. "This wound was caused by something hitting the top of the skull sufficiently hard to push in two flaps of bone on the inside surface. Although it looks dramatic, this wound would probably not have been fatal," said Dr Appleby. She added: "We have evidence of significant injuries on the skeleton, but we cannot conclusively prove that they were the cause of death.

At some point he loses his helmet and then the violent blows start raining down on the head Robert Woosnam-Savage, Royal Armouries "There are many ways of killing someone that leave no traces on the bones, even in a battle situation." Robert Woosnam-Savage is curator of European edged weapons at the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds and has also studied Richard's skeleton. He said: "Medieval battlefields saw an array of weapons used, from swords, battle hammers, maces, arrows and even early firearms. "Most of the 'common' foot soldiers would have used staff weapons, such as bills or halberds, which have heavy cutting blades, often with a spike, mounted on a long wooden haft. "Many of these were designed to be able to punch through elements of armour, or at least damage it in such a way that it no longer functioned." Mr Woosnam-Savage said using the physical evidence and historical accounts, a possible scenario could be imagined. Image caption Halberds were among the most common weapons used by foot soldiers at Bosworth "Richard probably got within a few yards of Henry before his horse probably became stuck in marshy ground or was killed from underneath him.

On foot, with foot soldiers closing in, the fight becomes a close infantry melee. "It would have been difficult to get through the armour, so attackers would have gone for gaps, or tried to break pieces off. "The skeleton only shows the minimum number of injuries - the soft tissue has gone - and he is likely to have taken many more wounds of which there is now no trace. "At some point he loses his helmet and then the violent blows start raining down on the head, including a possible blow from a weapon like a halberd, including the one which I think kills him. "Then I think it possible that someone has come along, almost immediately afterwards, possibly with his body lying face down and stuck a dagger into his head.

"From becoming unhorsed, it probably only took a matter of a few minutes, before he was dead - not a long time at all." Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre Alison Weir – Katherine of Aragon: The True Queen Talk Friday 17th March, 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm Alison will be talking about the history behind the fiction plus there will be an opportunity to purchase signed copies of the book Guided Walk Saturday 4th February, 11:30 am - 1:00 pm Join one of our experienced Guides for an informative 2 km guided walk exploring the Battle of Bosworth, the death of King Richard III and the unlikely victory of Henry Tudor. Guided Walk Saturday 4th February, 2:00 pm - 4:00 pm Join one of our experienced Guides for an informative 2 km guided walk exploring the Battle of Bosworth, the death of King Richard III and the unlikely victory of Henry Tudor.

Guided Walk Sunday 5th February, 11:30 am - 1:00 pm Join one of our experienced Guides for an informative 2 km guided walk exploring the Battle of Bosworth, the death of King Richard III and the unlikely victory of Henry Tudor. Guided Walk Sunday 5th February, 2:00 pm - 3:30 pm Join one of our experienced Guides for an informative 2 km guided walk exploring the Battle of Bosworth, the death of King Richard III and the unlikely victory of Henry Tudor. Guided Walk Saturday 11th February, 11:30 am - 1:00 pm Join one of our experienced Guides for an informative 2 km guided walk exploring the Battle of Bosworth, the death of King Richard III and the unlikely victory of Henry Tudor.

Treachery: what really brought down Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth | History Extra BBC History Magazine - 5 issues for £5 Richard III (1452–85) © Bridgeman Art Library/Topfoto On 22 August 1485, in marshy fields near the village of Sutton Cheney in Leicestershire, Richard III led the last charge of knights in English history. A circlet of gold around his helmet, his banners flying, he threw his destiny into the hands of the god of battles. Among the astonished observers of this glittering panoply of horses and steel galloping towards them were Sir William Stanley and his brother Thomas, whose forces had hitherto taken no part in the action. Both watched intently as Richard swept across their front and headed towards Henry Tudor, bent only on eliminating his rival. As the king battled his way through Henry’s bodyguard, killing his standard bearer with his own hand and coming within feet of Tudor himself, William Stanley made his move. Throwing his forces at the King’s back he betrayed him and had him hacked him down. Richard, fighting manfully and crying, “Treason!

Treason!”, was butchered in the bloodstained mud of Bosworth Field by a man who was, ostensibly at least, there to support him. Historians have been tempted to see Stanley’s treachery as merely the last act in the short and brutal drama that encompassed the reign of the most controversial king in English history. Most agree that Richard had murdered his two nephews in the Tower of London and that this heinous crime so shocked the realm, even in those medieval days, that his demise was all but assured. The reason he lost the battle of Bosworth, they say, was because he had sacrificed support through this illegal coup. But hidden among the manuscripts in the duchy of Lancaster records in the National Archives, lies a story that provides an insight into the real reason why Thomas, Lord Stanley, and his brother William betrayed Richard at Bosworth during the Wars of the Roses. The records reveal that for more than 20 years before the battle, a struggle for power in the hills of Lancashire had lit a fuse which exploded at Bosworth. Land grab The Stanleys had spent most of the 15th century building up a powerful concentration of estates in west Lancashire, Cheshire and north Wales.

As their power grew they came into conflict with gentry families in east Lancashire who resented their acquisitive and relentless encroachments into their lands. One such family were the Harringtons of Hornby. Unlike their Stanley rivals the Harringtons sided with the Yorkists in the Wars of the Roses and remained staunchly loyal. Unfortunately, at the battle of Wakefield in 1460, disaster struck. The Duke of York was killed and with him Thomas Harrington and his son John. The Stanleys managed, as ever, to miss the battle. They were very keen, however, to pick up the pieces of the Harrington inheritance and take their seat at Hornby, a magnificent castle that dominated the valley of the River Lune in Stanley country. When John Harrington had been killed at Wakefield the only heirs he left behind were two small girls. They had the legal right to inherit the castle at Hornby, but this would pass to whomever they married. Stanley immediately sought to take them as his wards and to marry them as soon as possible to his only son and a nephew. John Harrington’s brother James was equally determined to stop him.

James argued that his brother had died before their father at Wakefield and so he himself, as the oldest surviving son, had become the heir, not John’s daughters. To make good his claim he took possession of the girls, and fortified Hornby against the Stanleys. Unfortunately for Harrington, King Edward IV – striving to bring order to a country devastated by civil strife – simply could not afford to lose the support of a powerful regional magnate, and awarded the castle to Stanley. However, this was by no means the end of the matter. James Harrington refused to budge and held on to Hornby, and his nieces, regardless. What’s more, the records show that friction between the two families escalated to alarming proportions during the 1460s. In the archive of the letters patent and warrants, issued under the duchy of Lancaster seal, we can see the King struggling – and failing – to maintain order in the region. While James Harrington fortified his castle and dug his heels in, Stanley refused to allow his brother, Robert Harrington, to exercise the hereditary offices of bailiff in Blackburn and Amounderness, which he had acquired by marriage.

Stanley falsely indicted the Harringtons, packed the juries and attempted to imprison them. Revolt and rebellion This virtual state of war became a real conflict in 1469, when, in a monumental fit of pique, the Earl of Warwick – the most powerful magnate in the land, with massive estates in Yorkshire, Wales and the Midlands – rebelled against his cousin Edward IV. The revolt saw the former king, the hapless Henry VI, being dragged out of the Tower and put back on the throne. Stanley, who had married Warwick’s sister, Eleanor Neville, stood to gain by joining the rebellion. There were now two kings in England – and Edward was facing a bitter battle to regain control. In an attempt to secure the northwest, he placed his hopes on his younger brother, Richard Duke of Gloucester, the future Richard III. This had immediate consequences for Stanley and Harrington, for Richard displaced the former as forester of Amounderness, Blackburn and Bowland, and appointed the latter as his deputy steward in the forest of Bowland, an extensive region to the south of Hornby.

Even worse, from Stanley’s point of view, the castle of Hornby was in Amounderness, where Richard now had important legal rights. During the rebellion Stanley tried to dislodge James once and for all by bringing a massive cannon called ‘Mile Ende’ from Bristol to blast the fortifications. The only clue we have as to why this failed is a warrant issued by Richard, dated 26 March 1470, and signed “at Hornby”. It would appear that the 17-year-old Richard had taken sides and was helping James Harrington in his struggle against Stanley. This is hardly surprising as James’s father and brother had died with Richard’s father at Wakefield and the Harringtons were actively helping Edward get his throne back. In short, it seems that the Harringtons had a royal ally in Richard, who could challenge the hegemony of the Stanleys and help them resist his ambitions. The Harringtons’ support for Edward was to prove of little immediate benefit when the King finally won his throne back after defeating and killing Warwick at the battle of Barnet and executing Henry VI.

Grateful he may have been, but the harsh realities of the situation forced Edward to appease the Stanleys because they could command more men than the Harringtons and, in a settlement of 1473, James Harrington was forced to surrender Hornby. Richard ensured that he received the compensation of the nearby property of Farleton, and also land in west Yorkshire, but by the time Edward died in 1483 Stanley had still not handed over the lucrative and extensive rights that Robert Harrington claimed in Blackburn and Amounderness. A family affair One thing, however, had changed. The leading gentry families in the region had found a ‘good lord’ in Richard. He had been made chief steward of the duchy in the north in place of Warwick and used his power of appointment to foster members of the gentry and to check the power of Stanley. Only royal power could do this and Richard, as trusted brother of the King, used it freely. The Dacres, Huddlestons, Pilkingtons, Ratcliffes and Parrs, all related by marriage to the Harringtons, had received offices in the region and saw Richard, not Stanley, as their lord.

When Richard took the throne he finally had the power to do something for James Harrington. The evidence shows that he planned to reopen the question of the Hornby inheritance. This alone would have been anathema to Stanley but it was accompanied by an alarming series of appointments in the duchy of Lancaster. John Huddleston, a kinsman of the Harringtons, was made sheriff of Cumberland, steward of Penrith and warden of the west march. John Pilkington, brother-in-law of Robert Harrington, was steward of Rochdale and became Richard III’s chamberlain; Richard Ratcliffe, Robert Harrington’s wife’s uncle, was the King’s deputy in the west march and became sheriff of Westmorland. Stanley felt squeezed, his power threatened and his influence diminished. With Richard at Bosworth were a close-knit group of gentry who served in the royal household: men like John Huddleston, Thomas Pilkington and Richard Ratcliffe. They were men whom Richard could trust, but they were also the very men who were instrumental in reducing Stanley’s power in the northwest. By Richard’s side, possibly carrying his standard, was James Harrington.

When Richard III sped past the Stanleys at Bosworth Field he presented them with an opportunity too tempting to refuse. During the 1470s Richard had become the dominant power in the north as Edward’s lieutenant. He served his brother faithfully and built up a strong and stable following. The leading gentry families could serve royal authority without an intermediary. The losers in this new dispensation were the two northern magnates, Henry Percy and Thomas Stanley. Richard challenged their power and at Bosworth they got their revenge. When Richard rode into battle, with Harrington by his side, loyalty, fidelity and trust rode with him. Like the golden crown on Richard’s head they came crashing down to earth. 1000+ images about Richard III on Pinterest | Richard III, Loyalty and Tudor dynasty Forward Facial reconstruction on skeleton found under a car park in Leicester England shows how Richard III, much maligned King of England from 1483-1485, last of the Plantagenet kings, looked. Richard was accused of killing his nephews, the "Princes in the tower",and was defeated in The Battle of Bosworth Field. He was the last English king to die in battle. Henry VII became king after Richard.

Shakespeare had much to do with the smearing of Richard III at the behest of the Tudor monarchs. See More 1000+ images about Bosworth on Pinterest | Richard III, In august and The death King Richard III addresses his troops one last time - Bosworth Battlefield Anniversary Re-enactment 2013 See More

Question: At which ‘Field’ was Richard III’s final battle?
Answer: Bosworth