Who was Richard III - Last Plantagenet King to die in battle -Timeline - University of Leicester Who was Richard III? A Plantagenet primer on the last English king to die in battle. Although he only ruled for two years – from 1483 to 1485 – Richard III stands out among his peers as one of the most famous (or infamous) Kings of England. But who was he? And why does he continue to inspire such interest? Richard was born in Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire on 2 October 1452 – about 30 miles (50km) from Leicester and only about 40 miles (65km - two days’ ride) from Bosworth where he met his end a third of a century later. Richard and his older brother Edward were the great-great-grandchildren of Edward III, a line of descent which was used to justify the claim to the throne by the House of York during the Wars of the Roses (the House of Lancaster was also descended from Edward III, via a different route).

The Princes in the Tower The Princes in the Tower The Two Princes Edward and Richard in the Tower, 1483 by Sir John Everett Millais, 1878. Edward ruled as King Edward IV from 1461 until 1470 and again from 1471 until his death in 1483, when his 12-year-old son succeeded as Edward V, with Richard named Lord Protector. Young Edward and his brother moved into the Tower of London (which was then a royal palace, not a prison) but in June their parents’ marriage was declared invalid, making the princes illegitimate and hence their uncle became the heir apparent. Richard lost no time in being crowned King Richard III and the two boys were not seen again. Thus began the legend of ‘the Princes in the Tower’ and a long-standing popular belief that Richard had his nephews murdered in order to remove any competing claim to the throne. This has been widely debated for many years, with passionate arguments made both for and against Richard.

Death and disappearance After defeating an unsuccessful rebellion in October 1483, Richard led his army to Bosworth in Leicestershire two years later to face Henry Tudor (whose somewhat tenuous claim to the throne was also through descent from Edward III). On 22 August 1485, Richard was killed at Bosworth Field, the last English King to die in battle, thereby bringing to an end both the Plantagenet dynasty and the Wars of the Roses. Henry Tudor was crowned King Henry VII. Richard’s body was brought back to Leicester, publicly displayed and then given for burial to a group of Franciscan friars. An alabaster tomb monument was constructed over the grave in 1495, paid for by the new King. With the dissolution of the monasteries (by Henry Tudor’s son, Henry VIII) that friary disappeared and along with it any clear record of Richard’s grave. Stories and rumours about where Richard’s mortal remains lie – or what happened to them – have circulated over the ensuing centuries, but most of these have subsequently been shown to be tall tales. Re-evaluating Richard Portrait of Richard III of England, painted c.

1520 (approximate date from tree-rings on panel), after a lost original, for the Paston family, now owned by the Society of Antiquaries, London. History, they say, is written by the victors. Tudor writers and artists had no qualms about depicting Richard III as an evil tyrant and child-murderer, as well as a crippled hunchback. Shakespeare’s eponymous play, written 106 years after Richard’s death, cemented the King’s bad reputation (and appearance) among the general public for centuries, although scholars including Francis Bacon and Horace Walpole sought to re-evaluate his reign. In 1924 the Richard III Society was founded, aiming to challenge accepted beliefs and assumptions about ‘the last Plantagenet’, not least the accusation of murder and the popular depiction of Richard as having a crooked spine. Among the inarguably good works of this popular King, they pointed out, were a number of significant changes to English law, including the presumption of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and a reformation of the jury system.

With a controversial claim to the throne, accusations of blood on his hands, a violent and gory death, and a bad press (largely derived from a classic of English literature) – not forgetting serious debate about his physical appearance – it is no wonder that Richard III continues to fascinate historians, scholars and the public in the 21st century. Timeline BBC - History - King Richard III (pictures, video, facts & news) King Richard III King Richard III Richard was the last Yorkist king of England, whose death at the Battle of Bosworth effectively ended the Wars of the Roses. He has become infamous because of the disappearance of his young nephews - the Princes in the Tower - and through William Shakespeare's play 'Richard III'. In 2012, archaeologists and researchers began excavating beneath a carpark in Leicester, hoping to find Richard's final resting place. The search captured the public's imagination and the remains subsequently found were confirmed as those of Richard. Photo: Portrait of Richard III by an unknown artist. (National Portrait Gallery) Introduction The Battle of Bosworth Field Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485.

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, the celebrated climactic encounter of the Wars of the Roses. More information about: King Richard III Richard was born on 2 October 1452 at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire. His father was Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York and his mother Cecily Neville. Richard had a claim to the English throne through both parents. We now know that Richard had a curvature of the spine, but the withered arm and limp of legend are almost certainly either fabrications or greatly exaggerated. Wars of the Roses His father's conflict with Henry VI was a major cause of the Wars of the Roses, which dominated Richard's early life. His father and older brother died at the Battle of Wakefield in 1460. In 1461, Richard's brother, Edward, became Edward IV and created him Duke of Gloucester. In 1470, Edward and Richard were exiled when Henry VI was briefly restored to the throne. The following year, they returned to England and Richard contributed to the Yorkist victories at Barnet and Tewkesbury which restored Edward to the throne.

The Princes in the Tower and seizure of the throne When Edward died in April 1483, Richard was named as protector of the realm for Edward's son and successor, the 12-year-old Edward V. As the new king travelled to London from Ludlow, Richard met him and escorted him to the capital, where he was lodged in the Tower of London. Edward V's brother later joined him there. A publicity campaign was mounted condemning Edward IV's marriage to the boys' mother, Elizabeth Woodville, as invalid and their children illegitimate. On 25 June, an assembly of lords and commoners endorsed these claims. The following day, Richard III officially began his reign. He was crowned in July. The two young princes disappeared in August and were widely rumoured to have been murdered by Richard. The beginning of the end A rebellion raised in October by the Duke of Buckingham, Richard's former ally, quickly collapsed. However, Buckingham's defection, along with his supporters, eroded Richard's power and support among the aristocracy and gentry.

Death of a warrior king In August 1485, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, who was a Lancastrian claimant to the throne living in France, landed in South Wales. He marched east and engaged Richard in battle on Bosworth Field in Leicestershire on 22 August. Although Richard possessed superior numbers, several of his key lieutenants defected. Refusing to flee, Richard was killed in battle and Henry Tudor took the throne as Henry VII. 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." Richard III - King - Biography.com Richard III Richard III was king of England for two turbulent years. He is best known for being accused of murdering his nephews to protect his throne. IN THESE GROUPS Famous British People Synopsis Born in England on October 2, 1452, Richard III served as king of England for only two years, but his reign was one of the most historic and turbulent. He is credited with the responsibility for several murders, including those of his nephews Edward and Richard, and of Henry VI. Shakespeare portrayed him as a tyrannical ruler in his play, King Richard III, but modern scholars have pointed to evidence that Richard III was a successful leader. He died in England in 1485.

Early Life Born in Northamptonshire, England, on October 2, 1452, King Richard III remains one of England's most infamous rulers. Modern scholars, however, question how much his bad reputation is true and how much is myth. Richard arrived into this world with little expectation that he would win fame or claim power. He was the youngest surviving son of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York, and his wife, Cecily Neville. It is thought that Richard spent his early years at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire. Richard III was a child when his family, the House of York, engaged in battle against the Lancastrians for control of the country. This long and bloody civil conflict is known as the War of the Roses. Richard lost his father, an uncle and one of his brothers in December 1460 battling for the crown. Another brother, Edward IV, scored an impressive victory against King Henry VI, and his Lancastrian supporters the following February. When Edward IV officially took power in March 1461, young Richard became a prince.

He was also granted the title "Duke of Gloucester." When he was old enough, Richard assumed the rights and responsibilities with his noble status. Political Turmoil In 1469, the War of the Roses resumed with Richard's brother losing power in 1470. King Henry VI resumed his reign only briefly, however. Edward IV was back on the throne the following year. His loyalty to his brother Edward during this time brought Richard great rewards, including lands that once belonged to those who rose up against the king. He also was able to marry Anne Neville, the daughter of the earl of Warwick, and gain a share of her substantial wealth. Richard and Anne only had one child together, a son named Edward, around 1476. In the early 1480s, Richard III distinguished himself in battle. He helped his brother invade Scotland and received an area of Cumberland and the right to other lands for his efforts. His role in the campaign against Scotland had increased Richard III's prominence and power. Rise and Fall of King Richard III When King Edward IV died in 1483, his oldest son took power as Edward V—the new king was only 12 years old at the time.

As his uncle, Richard III wrestled control from his nephew in May 1483. He had himself appointed the king's lord protector, which allowed him to run the government. Richard also set into motion other plans to ensure that he could usurp the crown. Both Edward V and his younger brother Richard were taken into Richard III's custody. The two boys were imprisoned in the Tower of London where they spent the remainder of their days. Lord Hastings, a trusted adviser to King Edward IV, was executed on charges of treason. On July 6, 1483, Richard III officially became the country's new king. Despite his hard-fought efforts, Richard III only enjoyed a brief stint as monarch. He did make some attempts to ease tensions with the Lancastrians, allowing the relocation of Henry VI's remains to St. George's Chapel. He also sought to improve relations with Scotland by agreeing to a ceasefire. Despite his efforts, however, Richard III still found himself fighting hard against his adversaries to hold on to the crown. On August 22, 1485, he lost his life in the Battle of Bosworth; he was defeated by Henry Tudor, who would later become King Henry VII.

Over the years, Richard III has been portrayed as a brutal, cold-hearted villain. William Shakespeare wrote an entire play about this allegedly hunch-backed monarch: King Richard III. Since then, many famous actors have played him on stage and in films, including Laurence Olivier and Al Pacino. Recent News In September 2012, a team of archaeologists from Leicester University uncovered a body believed by some to be the remains of Richard III. The skeleton was uncovered at the former site of the Grey Friars church in Leicester, where Richard III was reportedly buried. The church had been destroyed in the 1530s, and the site had been a car parking lot in recent times. The recovered skeleton showed two remarkable similarities to Richard III. The deceased had died of a head injury received in battle and had "spinal abnormalities," according to a Reuters report. DNA samples were taken from the remains to be compared against a known descendant of Richard III's sister. In February 2013, the DNA results were revealed and verified the archaeological team's suspicions: The remains did, in fact, belong to Richard III. Shortly after the news broke, plans began for the body of the last Plantagent king to be re-interred.

In March 2015, after a funeral that included a solemn ceremony filled with royal pageantry, Richard III was ultimately laid to rest at Leicester Cathedral, not far from the archaeologist's site and where he met his grisly end. “The reinterment of King Richard III is an event of great national and international significance,” Queen Elizabeth II said, “Today, we recognize a king who lived through turbulent times and whose Christian faith sustained him in life and death.” Fact Check We strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact us ! Citation Information England's King Richard III died painfully on battlefield | Fox News England's King Richard III died painfully on battlefield Published September 16, 2014 Feb. 5, 2013: A facial reconstruction of King Richard III is displayed at a news conference in central London. (Reuters) LONDON – England's King Richard III might well have lost his kingdom for a horse. The reviled king suffered nearly a dozen injuries on the battlefield, but the fatal blows were probably only sustained after he had to abandon his horse, according to a new paper.

Since the skeleton of the 15th-century king was discovered under a parking lot in central England in 2012, scientists have done numerous studies, including an examination of his twisted spine that led Shakespeare to label him a hunchback. In the latest research, published Wednesday in the journal Lancet, scientists used computer scans and other methods to analyze the king's skeletal wounds. "Richard was probably in quite a lot of pain at the end," said Sarah Hainsworth, a professor of materials engineering at the University of Leicester and one of the study authors. She said the king was most likely attacked by numerous assailants after dismounting from his horse, which got stuck in a marsh. Richard's skeleton showed evidence of 11 injuries from weapons including daggers, swords and a long metal pole with an axe and hook that was used to pull knights off their horses. "Medieval battle was bloody and brutal," she said, noting one of the skull injuries showed a sword had pierced his head. The nine injuries Richard suffered to his head prove the king somehow lost or took off his helmet during the battle at Bosworth Field, against Henry Tudor, on Aug. 22, 1485.

He was the last English monarch to die in battle. Even if Richard's injuries had been treatable, it was highly unlikely his rivals would have shown him mercy, said Steven Gunn, an associate professor of history at Oxford University, who was not part of the research. "A live ex-king is just an embarrassment," he said. Gunn also said it was significant there were no attempts to disfigure Richard. "Having evidence that the real Richard III is dead is very useful," he said. "You don't want somebody popping up somewhere later claiming to be the real king." Hainsworth said the wounds in Richard's skeleton match historical accounts that he fought until the very end. "This doesn't tell us anything about what kind of king he was or the controversy surrounding his nephews," she said, referring to rumors that Richard murdered his two nephews to protect his throne. "Whatever else people think about him, he fought bravely until he died." Advertisement King Richard III: Fact & Biography Portrait of Richard III of England, painted c. 1520. Credit: public domain In his play "Richard III," Shakespeare depicted the king as a deformed killer and an evil tyrant.

As this was well before the age of 24-hour news and Twitter, it was the ultimate negative press of its time. While some elements of the play are grounded in fact, Shakespeare also took some artistic license, as the play was written more than 100 years after the king’s death and there was no one still alive who had known Richard III. Here are some of the facts and myths about Richard III. Early years The boy who would become Richard III was born in England on Oct. 2, 1452. He was the youngest surviving son of Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York, and his wife, Cecily Neville. There was not a high expectation that he was going to rise to fame — or infamy — based on his fairly quiet first years in Northamptonshire, England. Richard's life changed at an early age when his family, the House of York, waged the War of the Roses against the Lancastrians to gain control of the country. Richard's father, an uncle and a brother died in a December 1460 battle. Another of Richard's brothers, Edward, ultimately defeated Henry VI and his Lancastrian supporters the following February.

Young Richard became a prince when his brother took the crown as Edward IV in 1461. Ultimately, Richard assumed the title Duke of Gloucester. Richard's role as warrior The War of the Roses resumed again in 1469. Richard was involved in many key battles and was wounded. Edward IV lost power briefly in 1470 but his forces were ultimately victorious. Richard was able to enjoy the spoils of victory, marrying Anne Neville, the daughter of the Earl of Warwick, and gaining access to the family’s immense fortune. Richard and Anne’s only child, a son named Edward, was born around 1476, but he died at a young age, and Anne soon followed. In the 1480s, the future king went into battle again, assisting his brother to invade Scotland. His strong performance in this conflict bolstered his stature and fueled his rise to power. A contemporary drawing of Richard III and his queen, Anne Neville, and son, Edward, Prince of Wales Credit: public domain Time in power Richard's nephew, Edward V, took over when his father, King Edward IV, died in 1483. Edward V was only 12 years old when he became king.

In a power grab, Richard locked Edward V and his younger brother, Richard, in the Tower of London in May 1483. Richard has been accused of having his nephews murdered, but historians debate the boys' fate. It is possible that they died imprisoned in the tower but were not killed. Lord Hastings, a trusted adviser to Edward IV, was executed on charges of treason, completing Richard’s power grab; he became king on July 6, 1483. While serving as king for just two years, Richard III championed some principles of justice that still guide legal systems of today. He proclaimed that laws had to be administered impartially and justice had to be meted out quickly. He also established the concept that everyone had the right to be represented by a lawyer regardless of his or her ability to pay. Richard III relished his role as a warrior and he ultimately died in battle. He was killed on Aug. 22, 1485, by the forces of Henry Tudor at the Battle of Bosworth Field. He was not treated regally in death, and is the only king who didn’t have a tomb. His remains were recently unearthed in a parking lot in Leicester, England. Fact vs.

fiction Some of the biggest myths surrounding Richard III are related to his appearance. While Shakespeare's play portrays him as having an emaciated arm and a hunchback, historians have not uncovered any solid evidence of physical deformities. A portrait that is part of the official royal collection shows him with uneven shoulders, but there are indications that it — along with other portraits — was altered after completion to conform to that image. While it was once widely believed that Richard III murdered Edward, the Lancastrian Prince of Wales, there are reference materials that describe Edward as being killed on the field of battle in Tewkesbury. While the Shakespeare play has Richard III declaring "… for I did kill King Henry …," Henry VI died in the Tower of London on May 21, 1471, most likely at the orders of Richard III's brother, Edward IV. The Shakespeare play also fingers Richard III for the execution of his brother George, Duke of Clarence, but there is no evidence of his involvement. However, there was bad blood between brothers King Edward IV and George, and documents indicate that Edward had him executed for treason.

While in the play Richard III is portrayed as forcing his wife, Anne Neville, into marriage and then poisoning her, there is speculation that their marriage was loving, and there is evidence that she suffered from a serious disease, possibly tuberculosis. While Richard III is often painted as cold-hearted tyrant, he was also shown to be a lover of literature, music, architecture and education, in particular financing the chapel at King's College, Cambridge University, and supporting other collegiate churches. Author Bio Kim Ann Zimmermann, Live Science Contributor Kim Ann Zimmermann is a contributor to Live Science. She holds a bachelor’s degree in communications from Glassboro State College.

Latest on King Richard III: Fact & Biography Richard III | king of England | Britannica.com king of England Alternative Title: Richard Plantagenet, duke of Gloucester Richard III Richard Plantagenet, duke of Gloucester born Jasper Tudor, duke of Bedford Richard III, also called (1461–83) Richard Plantagenet, duke of Gloucester (born October 2, 1452, Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire, England—died August 22, 1485, near Market Bosworth, Leicestershire ), the last Plantagenet and Yorkist king of England. He usurped the throne of his nephew Edward V in 1483 and perished in defeat to Henry Tudor (thereafter Henry VII ) at the Battle of Bosworth Field. For almost 500 years after his death, he was generally depicted as the worst and most wicked of kings. Some of those charges are now regarded as excessive, the work of his enemies, and his supporters have attempted to rehabilitate him. Modern scholars take a more-balanced approach that avoids the extremes of either side. King Richard III, panel by an unknown artist.

Stefano Baldini/age fotostock Formative years The future Richard III was the fourth son of Richard , 3rd duke of York (died 1460), and his duchess, Cecily Neville, to survive to adulthood. York was the most prominent duke in England, of royal descent, and the most powerful nobleman of his day. Neville came from the most prolific , most politically prominent, and best married of contemporary noble houses. Young Richard was, therefore, supremely wellborn and well-connected; but, as the youngest son, he was of so little account that a verse genealogy of the family merely recorded that he “liveth yet.” Three brothers—Edward, 3rd earl of March; Edmund, earl of Rutland (died 1460); and George, 1st duke of Clarence (after 1461)—reached maturity. Consequently, Richard’s future at first was decidedly unpromising. United Kingdom: Richard III (1483–85) During Richard’s youth, York initiated the opening stages of the Wars of the Roses .

Three times York was appointed lord protector for his feeble cousin, the Lancastrian king Henry VI (reigned 1422–61 and 1470–71). In 1460 the Yorkist claim—York’s descent through the senior female line from Edward III (reigned 1327–77)—was recognized to be superior to the Lancastrian title through the junior male line of Henry VI. York himself was designated heir to the throne when Henry V died. However, this settlement, the Act of Accord, was resisted, and York was killed attempting to enforce it at Wakefield (now West Yorkshire) on December 30, 1460. This setback was reversed by York’s eldest son, Edward, who decisively defeated the Lancastrians in February 1461; he assumed the title King Edward IV on March 4, 1461, and his coronation took place on June 28. Although merely a child, Richard was directly affected by these upheavals and briefly took refuge in the Low Countries before his brother restored the family fortunes.

Britannica Stories Scientists Ponder Menopause in Killer Whales The succession of Edward IV made Richard a royal prince. He was quickly created duke of Gloucester and a knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter . He and his other brother, George, now duke of Clarence and also a child, resided together in a tower at Greenwich Palace in Kent. About 1465 Richard was placed in the household of his cousin Richard Neville , earl of Warwick, better known as “the Kingmaker.” He was recorded with him at Warwick and York. It was probably late in 1468, when he was 16 years old, that Richard was declared of age, took possession of estates conferred by his brother, and commenced public life, attending court and judicial commissions. The Wars of the Roses resumed in 1469, when Richard’s brother George and Warwick temporarily seized control of Edward IV and his government. Richard remained loyal and was appointed by Edward as his figurehead in Wales , the real ruling being undertaken by others.

When Warwick and George succeeded in reinstating Henry VI as king briefly in 1470, Richard joined Edward IV in exile in The Hague, later accompanying Edward on his victorious campaign in 1471. Richard was prominent at the Battles of Barnet (Hertfordshire), where he was slightly wounded, and Tewkesbury (Gloucestershire), where as constable he summarily condemned the Lancastrian leaders to death. With royal approval and definitely not on his own initiative , he may also have helped kill both Prince Edward of Lancaster and Henry VI. Structures of Government: Fact or Fiction? The real beginning of Richard’s adult life occurred in 1471, when he was 18 years old. Before his accession as king in 1483 he spent a dozen years as a great nobleman. Although this experience was useful training for kingship, it was not intended as such, for Richard cannot have expected to accede to the throne; instead, he built a future for the dynasty that he was intent on founding. Richard appeared at court, as well as at chapters of the Order of the Garter, in Parliament and royal council , and in major ceremonial occasions.

He led the largest company in his brother Edward’s abortive invasion of France in 1475 and was the chief mourner for his father and brother Edmund, both slain in 1460, at their ceremonial reinterment at Fotheringhay College in 1476. Britannica Lists & Quizzes Editor Picks: Exploring 10 Types of Basketball Movies Richard had been loyal to Edward IV in 1469–71, as was his duty. He earned the king’s gratitude and proved a doughty combatant worth cultivating . Hence, it was he who gained the most from the forfeitures of the losers, principally in eastern England. He coerced the aged countess of Oxford into surrendering her own inheritance. More important, he married Warwick’s youngest daughter, Anne Neville, widow of Edward of Lancaster. There is no need to suppose that this was a love match, for he insisted on her share of her parents’ immense inheritances in a bitter dispute with his brother George, husband of the elder daughter. The three royal brothers colluded in depriving the countess of Warwick of her entitlements , more than half of the whole.

Richard’s share of the Warwick inheritance was located partly in Wales but mainly in the north of England, where he was warden for the defense of the western marches toward Scotland. The Neville lands centred on Middleham in Richmondshire (now North Yorkshire), Barnard Castle in the county palatine of Durham, and Penrith in Cumbria. Single-mindedly, Richard extended his estates, adding, for instance, the castles of Helmsley, Richmond, Scarborough, and Skipton, all in Yorkshire; recruited a large retinue; and asserted himself over the other northern peers. Even the earls of Northumberland and Westmorland accepted his preeminence. In 1478 Richard’s acquiescence in—or perhaps positive approval of—charges of treason against his brother George permitted George’s execution, from which Richard was the principal beneficiary. Although Richard made himself more dominant than the king had originally intended, Edward accepted his hegemony once it had been established. This would be the power base for Richard as king. His self-advancement was crowned by the Scottish war of 1481–83, when he was appointed the king’s lieutenant in the north, recapturing Berwick and briefly occupying Edinburgh.

In 1483 Parliament thanked him, granted him Cumberland as county palatine, made him hereditary warden of the western marches, and authorized him to keep whatever Scottish territory he could conquer. A great future on the borders apparently beckoned, but he became king of England instead. Usurpation Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram Pinterest On April 9, 1483, Edward IV unexpectedly died. He was succeeded at once and without question by his eldest son, Edward V , a boy of 12. His uncle Richard, designated lord protector in the late king’s will, swore allegiance to the new king at York. However, the royal council, dominated by the dowager queen’s family, the Wydevilles (also spelled Woodville), decided to crown Edward V at once, which rendered any protectorate unnecessary and probably would have enabled them to rule on his behalf. They overrode the opposition of, among others, Edward IV’s former chamberlain, Lord Hastings, who enlisted Richard as his ally. The Wydevilles mistakenly believed that Richard was their friend, and the queen’s brother Earl Rivers arranged to meet with Richard and the duke of Buckingham en route from Ludlow (Shropshire) to London .

Richard staged his first coup d’état on May 1, 1483, at Stony Stratford (Northamptonshire). He seized Edward V, dismissed his household, and placed Rivers and Edward’s half-brother Lord Richard Grey in custody. Asserting his loyalty to Edward, Richard escorted him to London and was recognized by the royal council as lord protector. Henceforth he was head of government. The queen, her daughters, and Edward’s younger brother, also called Richard, took refuge in Westminster Abbey . Most people’s fears were allayed by Richard’s respectfulness to the king and by his continued preparations for the coronation. On June 13, however, Richard had Hastings executed (his second coup), allegedly for treasonable conspiracy but more probably to remove Edward’s most devoted supporter. On June 16 he secured possession of the younger Richard on the pretext of ensuring that the boy would attend Edward’s coronation. With both princes in his power, Richard publicly declared his claim to the throne, and on June 26 he usurped it. The usurpation was backed by the northern army, which overawed London from its camp at Finsbury Fields.

King Richard III and Queen Anne were crowned at Westminster Abbey on July 6, 1483. Trending Topics Open Door policy Although modern historians reject the allegations of Thomas More and William Shakespeare that Richard planned his usurpation well before Edward IV’s death, they debate precisely when he made up his mind and why. Probably this will never be known with any certainty. Was Richard motivated by personal ambition, by self-defense because he feared the Wydevilles, or by what he honestly considered his duty? His own justification was that he was the rightful heir because Edward IV’s children were illegitimate and therefore disqualified from the crown. According to the so-called precontract story, Edward IV had betrothed himself to Lady Eleanor Butler—an obligation as binding as marriage at this time—and thus had not been free to marry his queen, Elizabeth Wydeville ; any children by Queen Elizabeth, therefore, were illegitimate. However, Lady Eleanor was deceased by 1483, and there is no independent or contemporary evidence from the 1460s to support the claim of betrothal, which was never adjudicated by a competent church court.

In any event, the betrothal would not necessarily have invalidated Edward V’s kingship once he had acceded. It was also rumoured that Edward IV himself was illegitimate, an allegation which had been made twice before and which is not wholly incredible. (The children of Richard’s elder brother George were supposedly disqualified by his condemnation.) Such arguments may have been invented at the time and were probably pretexts to justify a usurpation on which Richard had already decided. Perhaps some of Richard’s contemporaries believed the precontract story, but many did not. This invalidates the argument that Richard had no need to kill the princes because they posed no threat to him owing to their illegitimacy. The two princes were obvious focuses for conspiracy. They were sure to become more dangerous as they grew up and progressed from pawns to active plotters. Just like earlier deposed monarchs, they had to be eliminated. Even though there is no reliable evidence, it seems certain that they were killed sometime in 1483—in the summer, when they disappeared, or in the autumn, when their deaths were rumoured. Henceforth politics operated on the assumption that they were dead, which Richard never denied.

Although some sources implicate Buckingham, most blame Richard, who had the princes in his power and who evidently decided to conceal their fate. Reign and fall Richard III presented himself as a reformer committed to justice and morality who would remedy the supposed misrule of Edward IV’s last years and the sexual license of his brother’s court. His signet registers reveal plans to improve the management of the royal estates and the north. He also came to an agreement with Queen Elizabeth and the Wydevilles. She accepted him as king, and he allowed her and her daughters to emerge from sanctuary and provided for them. Unfortunately, his good intentions could not be implemented in a reign of only two years or in the face of serious opposition. Although he abolished the highly unpopular forced gifts (benevolences) employed by his brother, sheer financial desperation forced him to revive them once again. He could not afford the cost of two years of mobilization against the threat of invasion from France. Reluctantly, Richard replaced the natural rulers of southern England, who had rejected his rule, with his own northern supporters, which some southerners equated with tyranny .

His position was gravely weakened by the deaths of his only son, Prince Edward, in 1484 and his queen in 1485. There was some good sense in the notion of marriage to Elizabeth of York, his niece and Edward IV’s daughter, who could have strengthened his title, would no longer have been available to marry Henry Tudor, and could have borne him sons anew. This plan, however—if it ever was a plan—was vetoed by his supporters and was highly unpopular. Richard’s support may have been diminished by highly effective propaganda presenting him as the murderer, like King Herod , of innocent “babes,” a betrayer like Judas Iscariot , a tyrant, and a committer of incest with his niece. Many members of the Yorkist establishment and county elites joined Buckingham and the Wydevilles in the rebellion of southern England late in 1483. Although Richard suppressed it, most of the leaders escaped to Brittany, where on Christmas Day they recognized the exiled Henry Tudor as king. Denounced by Richard as illegitimate, Tudor’s personal claim through the legitimated Beaufort line was extremely weak: it was important that Elizabeth of York remain available as his potential bride.

So hostile were the Yorkist exiles to Richard III that they were more concerned with deposing him than with the identity of his replacement. Although Richard sought Tudor’s extradition, all he achieved was his transfer from Brittany to France , where Tudor was able to recruit highly trained professional French and Scottish mercenaries. With these the exiles invaded England in 1485 and defeated Richard at the Battle of Bosworth Field . The scale and course of the battle and even the site where it took place are obscure and much disputed. A key role was certainly played by the Stanley family, whose northwestern contingents joined Tudor late in the battle. Fighting bravely, Richard himself was killed. Henry VII became the first Tudor king. Character Richard III was denigrated by John Rous (a 15th-century priest and antiquary), More, and Shakespeare . They maintained that Richard’s unnatural wickedness was foreshadowed by his unnatural birth and mirrored by his disfigured appearance.

Actually, the precise circumstances of Richard’s birth cannot be known; later accounts (recorded from 1491 onward) of a lengthy gestation, a difficult labour, a breech birth, and his emergence with teeth and hair were probably invented after his fall. Apparently a small man, Richard suffered from scoliosis (a type of curvature of the spine), but evidently he was neither a hunchback nor physically incapacitated as reputed. More recently, Ricardians have argued for his merits—as a good husband, a pious Christian, a loyal subject, ruler of the north, and a king committed to good governance. The truth lies in between. He possessed many qualities expected of a medieval king: courage, competence as a general and administrator, generosity, an interest in chivalry , and conventional piety. Effective kingship required his charisma , eloquence, persuasiveness, egotism, self-interest, and ruthlessness. Nice people did not make good kings. Unfortunately, his title was widely rejected, and his accession proved a political miscalculation. His usurpation was the result not of consent but of temporarily overwhelming force.

However sincere his protestations of the public good, ultimately Richard took the crown because of self-interest, and afterward he appeared to be fighting for his own benefit only. Michael Hicks Discovery of remains The precise location of Richard’s burial place had long been a mystery; all that was known was the approximate spot where he had fallen in battle and that he had been “irreverently buried.” In late 2012 a skeleton exhibiting signs of mortal injury inflicted in battle and of scoliosis was uncovered by archaeologists in a Leicester parking lot. In early 2013 genetic testing confirmed that the skeleton was that of Richard. Facial reconstruction of Richard III, based on the skull recovered with the other skeletal remains … Andrew Winning—Reuters/Landov The skeleton of Richard III. Reuters/Landov King Richard III died brutally during Battle - Telegraph UK News King Richard III died brutally during Battle It has been revealed that King Richard III was killed during battle after suffering severe injuries to his head and pelvis King Richard III died from a particularly brutal blow to the skull, scientists believe after a forensic analysis of his skeleton gave clues to his final moments.

The king appears to have been mutilated after his body was slung over a horse A sword or battleaxe spike was thrust four inches into the deposed monarch's head by King Henry VII's forces and appears to have claimed his life at the Battle of Bosworth, ending the War of the Roses. He suffered a total of 11 wounds around the time of his death, nine to his skull and two to the rest of his body, according to the analysis. Scientists have examined every aspect of his remains since they were discovered beneath a council car park in Leicester in 2012. "A number of injuries consistent with a dagger were identified to the cranium, jaw, cheek bones and tenth rib," said Professor Sarah Hainsworth who led the University of Leicester research. Related Articles Richard III set for 'dignified' Leicester reburial 23 May 2014 Experts believe it was one of two blows to his head or an impact to his pelvis that claimed the Plantagenet King's life, although investigators hinted that the pelvis injuries might have been inflicted after death as an act of vindictive battlefield celebration.

A computer simulation appears to show Richard's injuries are consistent with accounts that his body was thrown over a horse and mutilated by angry bystanders - the last king to die in battle in 1485. The intensity of the blows to his skull has lead the researchers to speculate that Richard either lost his helmet in battle - or had brazenly set off without it. Prof Hainsworth said: "Richard's injuries represent a sustained attack or an attack by several assailants with weapons from the later medieval period. The wounds to the skull suggest that he was not wearing a helmet, and the absence of defensive wounds on his arms and hands indicate that he was otherwise still armoured at the time of his death." Forensic experts used a series of CT scans to map the wounds inflicted on the king during and after the battle. But alongside the multi-million pound scanners, researchers used some unusual methods to determine conclusively what killed the monarch. An artist's interpretation of the dead Richard III's crown being presented to Henry Tudor (Alamy) A United Nations manual for the investigation of torture, remains from other medieval battlefields and a study of sword marks on cows' legs were all pressed into use by experts.

The study's co-author Professor Guy Rutty from the University of Leicester said: "The most likely injuries to have caused the King's death are the two to the skull, a large sharp force trauma possibly from a sword or staff weapon, such as a halberd or bill, and a penetrating injury from the tip of an edged weapon." An inch-long injury to his pelvis, one of the most vulnerable areas in medieval battle "Richard's head injuries are consistent with some near-contemporary accounts of the battle, which suggest that Richard abandoned his horse after it became stuck in a mire and was killed while fighting his enemies." Richard III Cause Of Death: Two Blows To The Head | The Huffington Post Richard III Cause Of Death: Two Blows To The Head 09/16/2014 07:01 pm ET | Updated Nov 16, 2014 570 By Kate Kelland LONDON (Reuters) - Scientists in Britain have given blow-by-blow details of King Richard III's death at the Battle of Bosworth more than 500 years ago and say two of many blows to his bare head could have killed him very swiftly.

Their analysis of the remains of the last English monarch to die in battle suggest he was attacked by one or more people, and that nine of 11 blows, clearly inflicted in battle, were to his skull and another possibly fatal blow was to his pelvis. The findings also support previous opinion that he had no helmet on. The head injuries are consistent with some near-contemporary accounts of the battle, the researchers said in findings published in The Lancet medical journal on Wednesday. "The wounds to the skull suggest that he was not wearing a helmet, and the absence of defensive wounds on his arms and hands indicate that he was otherwise still armored at the time of his death," said Sarah Hainsworth, a professor of materials engineering at Leicester University, who co-led the study. The remains of King Richard III were found by archaeologists under a municipal car park in the central English city of Leicester in 2012 and subsequently identified by experts from the city's university. A court ruled in May this year that the king should be reburied near to where he was slain in battle, dashing the hopes of descendants who had wanted his remains to be taken back to his northern English stronghold of York.

According to historical record, the monarch was killed in battle on Bosworth Field, near Leicester, on Aug. 22, 1485, and those accounts suggest Richard was forced to abandon his horse after it became stuck in a mire and was then killed fighting. His death was the culmination of the Wars of the Roses, a bloody 30-year power struggle between Richard's House of York and the rival House of Lancaster. Hainsworth's team used whole body computerized tomography (CT) scans and micro-CT imaging to analyze trauma to the bones and determine which of Richard's wounds might have proved fatal. They also analyzed tool marks on bone to identify the medieval weapons potentially responsible for his injuries.

According to Guy Rutty, a pathologist on the research team, "the most likely injuries to have caused the king's death are the two to the inferior aspect of the skull -- a large sharp force trauma possibly from a sword or staff weapon, such as a halberd or bill, and a penetrating injury from the tip of an edged weapon." (Editing by Louise Ireland) Leeds expert pieces together how Richard III died | Calendar - ITV News 5 February 2013 at 7:20am Leeds expert pieces together how Richard III died The skeleton of Richard III Photo: Historians and scientists who conducted a series of scientific studies on bones have now confirmed they are the remains of Richard III. Royal Armouries' curator Bob Woosnam-Savage formed part of an expert team that identified the remains of the "skeleton in the car park" as those of England's last king to fall in battle - Richard III. Now, nearly 530 years after his death, Mr Woosnam-Savage is attempting to get a better picture of just what happened to the king who famously gave battle in vain.

Historians believe Richard was buried at Greyfriars after his death at the Battle of Bosworth, in 1485 but his corpse was disinterred during the Dissolution. We know he was slain by the army of Henry Tudor, father of Henry VIII - but how? Mr Woosnam-Savage said: "What we have is a very tentative first attempt to try and create a possible narrative reconstructing the last minutes and death of Richard III, the last king of England to die in battle. It is extremely important to bear in mind that this is exactly that; a first attempt. It will no doubt evolve as more is discovered. "My narrative that follows is a synthesis, based upon various elements from the historical accounts - the veracity of each is a discussion for another time - and what we presently understand the evidence the skeleton may possibly suggest. The scenario offered suggests just one possible scenario. "Richard was described as leading a mounted charge against Henry Tudor in an attempt to kill him. Cutting down Tudor's standard bearer, Sir William Brandon, there is the possibility Richard's momentum was stalled by marshy ground, a feature confirmed by the recent archaeology of the Bosworth battlefield.

His horse stuck, or slain, Richard, fully armoured, continues fighting on foot, maybe only a few feet away from his intended target, Henry Tudor. "However, the tide of battle had seemingly already begun to turn as Stanley's forces decided to side with Tudor, and they came down upon the Plantagents and Richard. Tudor's own bodyguard would have been defending him as well and so, within a very short space of time, Richard could have found himself outnumbered and in the press of his enemies. But then what? "His armour, successfully protecting him up to this time, probably began to fail under ferocious attack. There is no evidence to say how long this sustained attack lasted but at some point it would appear that his helmet was forcibly removed (possibly cut or ripped away). It is perhaps from these moments that the skeleton appears to begin to provide some glimpses of a possible scenario, regarding the dying moments of Richard III. "At this time, Richard immediately receives more blows; a number of individual wounds from bladed weapons to the head, particularly to the top and rear of the skull, indicate a sustained and repeated attack on an unprotected head, one particularly massive blow possibly proving fatal.

That particular blow could well have been delivered by a staff weapon such as a halberd. Other blows, including a penetrating wound to the top of the skull, and another to the base, both again probably dealt to an unprotected head, appear to have been perhaps delivered either near, or at the point of, death, with Richard possibly finally keeling over in a kneeling position or even lying semi-prone on the ground (although the body position must remain speculative at this time). This trauma to the head certainly would appear to fit accounts that include descriptions such as his head was shaved and that his brains came out with blood. "However the skeleton bears other wounds which, if it were that of Richard, can only be explained as having been delivered after any armour was removed from the body and therefore probably after the king was presumably already near death, or dead. These 'insult injuries' might have included the small stab wound to the face; a stab in the back from behind, which struck a rib and, perhaps most tellingly of all, a stab wound, possibly delivered with a knife or dagger, to the buttocks.

This last, insulting, blow could easily have been delivered to king's body by an infantryman** *with a bladed weapon after it had been slung over the back of a horse, as he was borne to Leicester. * "Finally it should be borne in mind that the trauma to the skeleton (over 10 wounds) must be regarded as an under enumeration of the number of wounds the body originally sustained - for Richard may well have borne wounds to the soft tissue , which have not been preserved. The state of his body would therefore no doubt have matched descriptions which say Richard was all besprinkled with mire and blood. "We are obviously aware of how previous historians, including Murray Kendall, have been vilified for attempting to create such an account but with the discovery of the skeleton we are now approaching a time when we can indeed begin to create such a picture with a degree of accuracy, especially as all of the identified traumas are indeed consistent with what we know about the death and subsequent treatment of the corpse of Richard III. However to reiterate, this is only a first attempt to contextualise what has been discovered so far and more work, from me and others, will without doubt follow.

Last updated Mon 21 Jul 2014

Question: King Richard III of England died in which battle?
Answer: Bosworth Field