[kwan]

Is richard 3rd a monster,if he is can u give me some information plz!!!
thank

[MrJohnDClare]

The thing about Richard III is that for centuries - notably in Shakspeare's play, Richard III - Richard WAS portrayed as a monster (who, amongst other things, had a hunch back and murdered the princes in the Tower - as in this 1805 painting)


In 1952, however, a novelist who wrote under the name 'Josephine Tey' published a book called The Daughter of Time, in which Richard III was presented, not as a monster, but as a good man.
What we know about Richard III, argued Tey, was written by his enemies, the Tudors, and everything they wrote was wicked propaganda desgined to blacken his name.
The real Richard III, she argued, was innocent.

(A 'revisionist' view of Richard grew up, supported by historians who argued that he was NOT monster.
There is a whole websirte devoted to it here.)

Of course, there were other historians (including the great Winston Churchill) who argued that Richard WAS a monster, so there has been a great debate.
But generally now it is accepted that Richrd III was not as bad as he was painted - although recently the bones of two boys were fiund in the Tower of London, re-fuelling suggestions that Richard had killed the 'princes in the tower'.
You need to read this BBC account.


This is a very hard passage, but it talks about the debate in good detail.

[Cyfer]

in my opinion he is a semi-hero due to the hardships he survived on the way back from his unsuccessful crusade. Thanks for the link Mr Clare, this topic is great and i'd love reading into this in further detail

[kwan]

thanks