Dr Kat and Framing Richard III?

hello and welcome back to the channel if you're new here hi you're very welcome this is reading the past and I'm dr. Kat I am somewhat concerned about how willing people seem to be two separate historical figures up into heroes or villains good guys or bad guys and I say concerned because I don't think that any person who really lived is fit to be separated up into such a binary fashion however that isn't to say it doesn't happen and in fact perhaps one of the most famous people in English history to be put firmly in the villain or bad guy camp is which the third he is accused of many things but most famously of murdering his two nephews the princes in the tower in order to clear his own part of the throne however while many people might see him as a villain there are some that were willingly defend him vociferous Lee which the third is a rarity he is one of the few English monarchs to have his own fan club than which of the third Society for this society which the third was a good lord a loyal brother a loving family member and eventually a noble King whose reputation and legacy has been unfairly maligned in the years after his death and they blame one person for the ruining of witches reputation and that's William Shakespeare for the Witch of the third Society William Shakespeare deliberately shaped a false narrative of which the third as a physically deformed and morally repulsive human being in order to serve the Tudor propaganda machine and this is an idea that I want to explore in today's video how culpable is William Shakespeare for the way we view which of the third now is William Shakespeare responsible for effectively framing Richard the third is this a historical version of making a murderer [Music] [Music] was rich the third guilty or innocent for the disappearance and potential murder of his nephews if not then should Shakespeare have to answer for his irreversible tarnishing of the memory of the man also if not Richard then who what did happen to the prince in the tower who are the other suspects these are some of the questions that I want to explore today but before I do so I think it best that we look at the timeline of events during the Easter period of 1483 Edward the fourth falls ill on the 9th of April 1483 so within days Edward the fourth has died his son is now Edward the fifth and he was at his seat as the Prince of Wales in Ludlow plans are almost at once set in motion for the new king to come to London for his coronation which was originally intended to take place on the 4th of May on his journey he was to be accompanied by his household and retinue which included his maternal uncle Anthony Earl rivers and his half-brother Richard gray on the 30th of April 1483 Richard Duke of Gloucester and Henry Stafford Duke of Buckingham intend to intercept the Royal party they arrest Earl rivers and move quickly to Stony Stratford to collect the King arrest his household officers and dismiss his escort first of May 1483 the Dowager Queen Elizabeth Woodville removes herself her five surviving daughters and son Richard Duke of York to sanctuary in Westminster Abbey on the 4th of May 1483 Edward v and Richard Duke of Gloucester enter London Richard is recognised as protector Edward the fifths coronation is delayed until the 22nd of June on the 10th of June 1483 Richard sends word to York requesting military help against a Woodville conspiracy which was allegedly led by the Queen herself on the 13th of June 1483 William Lord Hastings a man known for his loyalty to Edward the fourth is someone re executed at the Tower of London Lord Stanley the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of Ely are also arrested on the 16th of June 1483 the Dowager Queen is persuaded and some argue possibly threatened into allowing Richard Duke of York to leave sanctuary for his brother's coronation almost at once that coronation is again postponed this time until the 9th of November on the 22nd of June 1483 dr. Ralph Shaw gives a sermon that asserts that Richard Duke of Gloucester has the rightful claim to the throne and should be recognized as which the 3rd Elizabeth Woodville and Edward the 4th it seems were never really married due to his pre contract with Eleanor Butler therefore all their children are illegitimate and as such have no right to the English throne on the 26th of June 1483 Richard takes his seat in Westminster on the 6th of July 1483 Richard is crowned as which at the 3rd his nephews are last seen playing from the tower complex around this time in early July by late July 1483 Richard is on royal progress when he hears word of an attempt to rescue the princes in the tower this attempt is deemed by some as a possible cause for the princes death late summer 1483 is the suggested time period for the princes deaths September 14 83 it is believed that the princes must be dead by this point as rebels against which the 3rd have begun to rally around Henry Tudor the Dowager Queen seems to have shared this belief in her son's demise as she starts to plan with Margaret Beaufort who was the mother of Henry Tudor the future Henry the 7th the women planned that Elizabeth of York daughter of the Dowager Queen and Edward the 4th should marry Henry Tudor it is believed that these women used their shared as a conduit for these plans if Elizabeth Woodville had any hope that her sons were still alive it seems unthinkable as far as I'm concerned that she would plot to disinherit them in favor of their sister and a Lancastrian boy with a dubious claim to the throne on Christmas Day 1483 at Rennes Cathedral Henry Tudor pledged to marry Elizabeth of York on the 1st of March 1484 Elizabeth Woodville who was no longer able to claim the title of Queen or Dowager Queen comes to terms with which the third she leaves sanctuary and submits to him allows him to work towards finding suitable husband's for her daughters she also encourages her son Thomas grey the Marquess of Dorset to desert the rival claimant Henry Tudor and returned to England for those who believe in which the thirds innocence this moment and one that follows it is seen as being evidence that he wasn't guilty if Elizabeth Woodville believed her sons were dead at Richard's hands would she ever have come to terms with him quite possibly not however for others they do not see this moment as any such proof rather they see Elizabeth Woodville leaving sanctuary and coming to terms with Richard as a potential act of desperation and fear perhaps she does believe her sons are dead at Richard's hands and if somebody is prepared to transgress in such a cataclysmic way what security could sanctuary at Westminster Abbey offer her and her daughters they would argue that perhaps she knows that which has killed her sons and she is so frightened that he might move against the rest of her family that she decides to do whatever he tells her to during Christmas 1484 Elizabeth of York the daughter of Lizabeth Woodville and Edward the fourth is at her uncle's Court for the festivities following this moment Richard the third would be forced to deny that he was planning to marry Elizabeth of York himself on the 22nd of August 1485 the Battle of Bosworth Field is fought Richard loses his crown his country and his life the rival claimant Henry Tudor becomes King of England on the 4th of June 1487 but Simnel who is claiming to be Edward Earl of Warwick the son of George Duke of Clarence lands in England he has an army of mercenaries paid for by the sister of Edward the fourth Margaret Duchess of Burgundy the real Warwick however was still alive Lambert Simnel ends up working in the Royal kitchens on the 7th of September 1497 Perkin Warbeck who claims to be Richard Duke of York Edward the 5th younger brother lands in Cornwall to claim his throne his forces are defeated and he is eventually executed on the 23rd of November 1499 at Tyburn in 1577 and 1587 two editions of holland heads chronicles are published the latter being an edited and extended form of the first between 1592 and 93 is the suggested date for william shakespeare to write richard the third in 1670 for the skeletal remains of two children are found at the Tower of London they are interred as the princes in Westminster Abbey on the orders of Charles a second between August and September 2012 the skeletal remains the male with a pronounced curvature of the spine and catastrophic battlefield injuries is discovered beneath the car park in Leicester genealogical research DNA analysis isotope analysis radiocarbon dating and forensic examination will combine to show that these are the remains of Richard the third William Shakespeare certainly paints which the third in a very unflattering light in Shakespeare's portrayal the king is frankly an irredeemable villain the play opens on a London Street and we meet Richard then Duke of Gloucester Shakespeare gives him arguably one of the most famous monologues in all of the Canon and in that monologue we see Richard explained who he is and just how nefarious his plans are going to be here is that monologue now now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this son York and all the clouds that lourd upon our house in the deep bosom of the ocean buried now are our brows bound with victorious wreaths our bruised arms hung for monuments our Stern alarums changed to merry meetings our dreadful marches to delightful measures grim-visaged war hath smooth'd his wrinkled front and now instead of mounting barbed steeds to Fright the souls of fearful adversaries he capers nimbly in a lady's chamber to the lascivious pleasing of a lute but I that am NOT shaped for sportive tricks nor made to court an amorous looking-glass I that am rudely stamped and want loves Majesty to strut before a wanton ambling nymph I that am curtailed of this fair proportion cheated of feature by dissembling nature deformed unfinish'd sent before my time into this breathing world scarce half made up and that so lamely and unfashionable that dogs barked at me as I thought by them why I in this weak piping time of peace have no delight to pass away the time unless to spy my shadow in the Sun and descant on mine own deformity and therefore since I cannot prove a lover to entertain these fair well-spoken days I am determined to prove a villain and hate the idle pleasures of these days plots have I laid inductions dangerous by drunken prophecies libels and dreams to set my brother Clarence and the King in deadly hate the one against the other and if King Edward be as true and just as I am subtle false and treacherous this day should Clarence closely be mew'd up about a prophecy which says that G of Edwards heirs the murderer shall be William Shakespeare's Richard is a bitter man he informs us that he is born deformed and out of his physical deformity it would see that Shakespeare is showing us that his morality has also been affected because he feels he is not made for love he decides to spread hate at this very very early stage in the play we already see him attempting to spread hate between his two brothers to incite his eldest brother the King to act against George Duke of Clarence as I mentioned previously the Richard the third Society accuses William Shakespeare and his play of irreversibly tarnishing the legacy and memory of their hero and undoubtedly in the modern world the play that Shakespeare wrote has an enormous global reach however I do think it's important to remember that William Shakespeare often worked from some other source in the case of his history plays college heads chronicles was the text that he used most commonly these chronicles were published in two editions one in 1577 and one in 1587 now I want to look at that second edition from 1587 to see what they have to say about rich the third and his appearance attitude and behavior so that we can think about what Shakespeare was working with when he came to write his own play in The Chronicles this section is titled as follows the history of King Edward the fifth and King Richard the third unfinished written by master Thomas More then one of the under sheriff's of London about the year of our Lord 1513 according to a copy of his own hand printed among his other works of Richard the third the following is said Richard the third son of whom we now entreat was in wit and courage equal with either of them in body and prowess far under them both little of stature ill featured of limbs crook backed his left shoulder much higher than his right hard favorite of village and such as in other states called Walley in other men otherwise he was malicious wrathful envious and from a for his birth ever forward it is for truth reported that his mother had so much ado in her travail that she could not be delivered of him uncut and that he came into the world with feet forward as men born outward and as the same run is also not unto weather men of hatred report above the truth or else that nature changed her course in his beginning which in the course of his life many things are naturally committed where his advantage grew he spared no man's death whose life withstood his purpose he slew with his own hands King Henry the sick being chrismal in the tower as men constantly said and that without commandment or knowledge of the King which would undoubtedly if he had intended that thing have appointed that butcher officer some other than his own born brother some wise men also we that his drift courtly connived lacked not in helping forth his brother of Clarence to his death which he resisted openly howbeit somewhat as men deemed more faintly than he that were heartily minded to his wealth and they that thus deemed think that he long time in King Edward's life for thought to be king in case that the King his brother whose life he looked that evil diet should shorten should happen to decease as indeed he did when his children were young and they deemed that for this intent he was glad of his brother's death the Duke of Clarence whose life must needs have hindered him so intending whether the same Duke of Clarence had kept him true to his nephew the young King or Enterprise to be king himself in this volume as within Shakespeare's play there appears to be no doubt that rich the third was responsible for killing his nephews the chronicler says King Richard after his coronation taking his way to Gloucester in his new honour the town of which he bear the name of his old devised as he rode to fulfill the thing which he before had intended and for so much as his mind gave him that his nephews living men would not reckon that he could have right to the realm he thought therefore without delay to rid them as though the killing of his kinsmen could amend his cause and make him a kindly King to the plot for sir James Turrell devised that they should be merged in their beds to the execution wear off here did miles forest one of the four that kept them a fellow fleshed in murder before time to him he joined one John Dayton his own horse keeper a big broad square and strong knave then all the other being removed from them this miles Forrest and John Dighton about midnight the Seelye children lying in their beds came into the chamber and suddenly lapping them up among the clothes so to barracks them and entangled them keeping them down by force the featherbed and pillows hardened to their mouths that within awhile smothered and stifled they laid their bodies naked upon the bed and fetch Sir James to see them which upon the sight of them caused those murderers to bury them at the stair foot meekly deep in the ground under a great heap of stones as we attempt to decipher what actually happened to Richard and Edward the prince in the tower we're of course going to be drawn to think about the potential suspects their means motive an opportunity however we should also consider that perhaps something else happened maybe these princes disappeared but didn't die or if they did die does it necessarily mean that it had to happen at somebody's hand let's consider these things as we move forward let's start by looking at the suspects let's start with arguably the prime suspect for many the boy's uncle Richard Duke of Gloucester later which the third as king of England Richards means would be virtually unparalleled he has almost limitless power within England also the two boys are held under his control within his fortress and Palace at the Tower of London if they are killed there and it is murder and Richard doesn't know what's gone on and he didn't order it then something is already very wrong with his nation and rule if he has lost control of this fortress in such a cataclysmic way then we must question how strong his kingship was in terms of motive Richard the third I think like any King would want to ensure that his reign was unchallenged as strong and stay evil as possible having two potential rivals in the wings is problematic when those rivals are boys they are potential puppets a focus for rebellion if anybody is dissatisfied or disaffected with Richards government now despite the fact that these boys had been termed illegitimate and therefore not able to inherit the throne that doesn't mean that some rebels wouldn't try to set them up in that position does their continued survival threaten not only Richards rule but also potentially his life in terms of opportunity if we are willing to agree that the boys are murdered in the late summer of 1483 then Richard could not have carried out the deed himself because he was on royal progress in the north however as I mentioned as king he had almost limitless means he certainly had the capacity to employ somebody to do the act for him and also as King of England he would have had the right to order the Tower of London to allow this potential murderer in he would potentially have been able to say leave them alone with the boys nobody theoretically could have questioned that behavior however if such an order did go out would the people the tower who would have had to allow the murderer in have stayed silent certainly Sir Thomas More wood lathe report that in 1502 one James Turrell when under interrogation would confess to murdering the princes on their uncle's orders however no other record of this confession exists today I think it is telling that Richard never presents the boys publicly so between their alleged disappearance in 1483 and the Battle of Bosworth in 1485 when questions about their whereabouts are being raised the fact that he doesn't present them is troubling if they were alive wouldn't he show them to the world so that no further rebellion could be fermented by not showing them does that mean he wasn't able to because they were already dead however if we are willing to believe that which had kills these two boys to secure his own place on the throne and to ensure that nobody might claim that they have a better right to be there in him we must question why he allows his other nephew Edward Earl of Warwick to live Edward is the son of Richard's elder brother George Duke of Clarence and therefore has a better claim to the English throne than riched himself and yet Edward Earl of Warwick is still alive well into the reign of Henry the seventh so if Richard is going about killing nephews to secure his own place on the throne why wouldn't he kill all of them why would he kill two who have already been debarred from the throne on account of the apparent legitimacy of their parents marriage but Richard is not the only suspect for the disappearance of the princes and with that in mind who else or what else might actually be responsible Henry Stafford Duke of Buckingham is another potential suspect he seems to have been at Richard's side on his path the throne Henry and Richard go and collect Edward the fifth together together they separate Edward from his household and maternal family they are responsible it seems for executing a number of people who would have stood against Richard as he ascends to the throne and if Buckingham is responsible for the death of the princes because of Richard's orders then that means that Richard is ultimately responsible he is simply ordering somebody else do the crime in this case we are looking at buckingham as a suspect without which knowing but did Buckingham have the means to carry out the murders many argue that without Richard's knowledge or consent he would not have been able to gain access to the princes in the tower in order to kill them others disagree stating that as the constable of England he absolutely could have they believe that in this role different rules apply that he would have been able to access the tower and kill the boys but what motive would he have for acting in this way without which its consent is he doing it to stabilize Richard on the throne getting rid of any potential rival claimants but if this is the case why does he let Edward Earl of Warwick live alternatively some have argued that Buckingham may be seeking to clear his own path to the English throne that as a descendent of Edward the third he may have felt that he also should have a claim to the crown but if that's the case there once again we come back to that question of why do you let Edward Earl of Warwick live if you want to get rid of all rivals then surely he'd need to go as well maybe buckingham has a different intention in mind in killing the princes it has been suggested that in doing so he was attempting to destabilize the rule of Richard the third by killing these popular visible boys boys about whom questions would be asked he is in effect destabilizing his kingship perhaps for himself so that he may accede to the throne or on behalf of another some have named Henry Tudor as that other indeed when buckin rebelled against which the third he asserted that he supported the claim of Henry Tudor however for Boheme to have had the opportunity to murder the princes and therefore act against their uncle he would have had to have killed them before the second of November 1483 because on that date which the third had Buckingham executed for treason if we are willing to accept that a potential motive for the murders the prince in the tower was to destabilize either the rule or the legacy of Richard the third then we have to consider two more suspects Margaret Beaufort's and her son Henry Tudor the future Henry the seventh some have alleged that Margaret Beaufort may have killed the prince in the tower before her son even arrived in England to win the Battle of Bosworth and become King now while I can see her certainly having the motive because seeing your son as king of England would have been a fairly large one I'm not sure that she would have had either the means or the opportunity I don't know how Margaret Beaufort would have got access to the boys or how she would have been able to bribe or cajole somebody else to get access to the boys for her in order to kill them however after Bosworth in 1485 when Henry is now Henry the seventh of England potentially all bets are off if we imagine that Henry Tudor has arrived in England one the Battle of Bosworth become King and then turned up at the Tower of London to find that the princes were alive is it possible that he and/or his mother would have deemed it absolutely vital that they be killed the Tudor dynasty started by Henry the seventh would claim that they ruled England by right of conquest that they had defeated the tyrant Richard a villain who had no doubt killed his own nephews if it was found that the boys were alive then potentially richer as a tyrant and therefore Henry the seventh right to rule might be in question it is also telling that in the case of the two imposters that appear during Henry the Simmons reign he is absolutely sure that they are lying now obviously when it comes to Lambert Simnel he knows he's lying because he can't be Edward Earl of Warwick because Henry has Edward Earl of Warwick in his custody but in 1497 when Perkin Warbeck appears claiming to be Richard Duke of York Henry is equally convinced that this is not the younger brother of Edward the fifth and we have to ask why is he so convinced why is he sure that Perkin Warbeck cannot be who he claims to be is it because he knows the boy is dead and is that because he or his mother are responsible for killing him both Henry the seventh and his mother Margaret Beaufort would have wanted to ensure that his rule was completely stable that nobody could gain say it or claim to have a better right to the throne than he did indeed unlike Richard the third he decides to move against that other rival claimant and he has Edward Earl of Warwick son of George Duke of Clarence executed for treason in 1499 however for either Henry the seventh or Margaret Beaufort to be responsible for killing the prince in the tower it is necessary that they live out their uncle's reign that they are still alive when Henry wins at Bosworth and for this to be the case we come back to that question of why when richard is challenged about their whereabouts he does not present them however perhaps that is because he can't present them and not because of the nefarious reason that he has had them murdered perhaps Richard couldn't present him to the public because they were dead although that doesn't necessitate that he is the one that killed them if we agree that the boys were dead in 1483 I think it's important to point out that Erasmus says that this was the year when the English sweat first appeared sweating sickness was a terrifying rapid and highly fatal illness so the saying would go people be merry at breakfast and dead by dinner is it possible that keeping these two boys so close to the City of London with its propensity for play throughout summer was an act of negligence but not malice on the part of their uncle did these two boys catch something and sicken and die if this was the case would Richard have thought it necessary to attempt to cover up their deaths lest he be accused of murder another potential solution that I think we should consider is that Richard simply let him go that he removes them from royalty and from court life and sets them up in in quote normal lives that they will be able to grow up in peace and also safety is this then maybe a reason why Elizabeth Woodville leaves sanctuary in 1484 rather than being scared about what her former brother-in-law might do next in his depravity how she had word that her boys are alive is that why she complies with Richard sends her daughter to court at Christmas and orders her son back from Henry to decide how she received new information that proves to her that her boys are actually still alive and that Richard is protecting them from the dangers of real life so I'd love to know what you think about today's discussion is Richard the third responsible for killing his nephews what part did William Shakespeare play in maligning which the thirds name what about those other suspects and solutions do we know in the comment section down below or you can come and find me over on my social media I'll leave the links in the description box so you can follow me there and we can continue this conversation I do hope you enjoyed this video and found it useful if you did please let me know by hitting the thumbs up please also subscribe to this channel and click the belly icon so that YouTube tells you when I've next uploaded I hope you're gonna have a great day whatever you're doing and I look forward to speaking to you in my next video take care of yourselves bye bye for now [Music] [Music]

Channel: undefined

Views: 90,813

Rating: 4.9531889 out of 5

Keywords: Princes in the Tower, Richard III, Henry VII, Margaret Beaufort, Henry Stafford, Buckingham, William Shakespeare, Education, Literature, Culture, History, Early Modern, Renaissance

Id: sB_5TuwHd5U

Length: 31min 43sec (1903 seconds)

Published: Fri Oct 25 2019