Yes it is

[gillo]

The human remains found under a car park in Leicester are "beyond reasonable doubt" those of Richard III, last Plantagenet King of England.

I read Daughter of Time at an impressionable age. I'm not a rabid Ricardian, but I am rather pleased that the evidence shows he was not a deformed monster but a lightly-built youngish man with scoliosis -

Comments

[shapinglight]

I'm looking forward to seeing the program about it this evening. I was always a Ricardian.

That said, I suspect he probably was responsible for the death/disappearance of his nephews, if only because it's hard to see who else would have benefited from the same.

[gillo]

I don't really wear the idea that Henry Tudor had more to gain from their deaths, no - he would have trotted them out and got them to abdicate all claims. Then execute them as young adults, probably.

Richard had such a short reign it's difficult to work out how good he was, but he seems to have been a very competent administrator and offered peace. His claim to the throne was certainly better than Henry's.

[fjm]

Except that the strength of Henry's claim is almost entirely through his wife, and if the boys are alive...

But what is much more interesting is that the "hey, I won" argument was not considered quite enough, because of the need to end the turn and turn about nature of the Lancastrian/Yorkist claims.

[curiouswombat]

Except that the strength of Henry's claim is almost entirely through his wife, and if the boys are alive...

This has always seemed to me to be the main reason to suspect Henry not Richard. They were legally declared illegitimate and so were no real threat to Richard - but being married to an illegitimate daughter of a former king wasn't much claim for Henry...

[angevin2]

Well, legal declarations of illegitimacy are the sort of thing that can be changed pretty quickly depending on who's got the power (in fact, Henry VII's claim also came from a line that had been legally barred from succession, and both of his granddaughters were officially illegitimate at one point or another). He may or may not have done it, but I'd argue that "they weren't a threat" is a bit overstated.

[curiouswombat]

Yes - but then I am a Yorkist, from a family of Yorkists...

And they would, most certainly, have been a threat to Henry if they were alive when he took over....

[angevin2]

Sure they would have! I just think that since both of them would have benefited from the deaths of the princes, I'm not sure it's that useful to the case against either one of them on its own.

[gillo]

That's much my feeling. Those boys were probably doomed as soon as it was obvious their father would not live another decade.

Shakespeare's villain is a brilliant portrait of evil. He is no more the real person than Cymbeline is Cunobelinus.

[gillo]

Henry did insist on being crowned before his marriage, mind you, so there would be no suggestion that he held the kingdom only by right of his wife. His own claim was tenuous to say the least, but right of conquest followed by several years of relative peace was a pretty convincing argument.

I Want to Be a Part of It, New York, New York

[executrix]

In those days, if you'd insisted on The Cut Direct for *everyone* who bumped off their relatives for dynastic reasons, you would have had no Christmas card list left.

I don't know why everyone in the Shakespeare play treats Richard III as if he were the only one involved in getting rid of HVI though--it seems to me more like Fun for the Whole Family.

Re: I Want to Be a Part of It, New York, New York

[velvetwhip]

In those days, if you'd insisted on The Cut Direct for *everyone* who bumped off their relatives for dynastic reasons, you would have had no Christmas card list left.

So very true... and well put.

Gabrielle

Re: I Want to Be a Part of It, New York, New York

[gillo]

Good point. Henry VIII had a fair go at that too.