My History Essay

Hey, if any of you people out there are actually interested, here is my history essay:

ESSAY PLAN: DID RICHARD III KILL THE PRINCES?

Introduction:
Surrounded by much controversy and mystery, the question as to whether Richard III murdered the princes in the tower is one that has remained unanswered throughout history. As with any other case, there are numerous views on this particular matter. In my personal opinion though, Richard III did not kill the princes.

Paragraph 1:
To begin with, there are many pieces of evidence which depict Richard as being a devoted brother, uncle, and ruler. During the War of the Roses, by following Edward into exile, and fighting alongside him in the battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury, Richard proved his loyalty. His affection and sense of protection toward the princes may have been the cause of his failure to bring them out in public upon request. Despite the first written account of this matter being thoroughly against him, the quote, ‘he would neuer putte them to death’, quite clearly states the unlikelihood of his being the murderer. The postcards in the Battlefield Church are also proof of his fair rulings, with praise for his bravery, loyalty, and worthiness.

Paragraph 2:
Furthermore, during the Tudor’s reign, Richard was, naturally, portrayed as a villainous character with many documents supporting him destroyed, hence making later evidence likely to be biased. Due to the lack of available facts, Shakespeare’s play, ‘Richard III’, and Thomas More’s work, ‘History of King Richard III’, were largely sourced from John Morton. However, Morton himself had a low opinion of Richard III due to the fact that he had been imprisoned by Richard for treason. Therefore, these heavily biased works may have severely influenced later accounts and opinions. This effect is shown through the altered portrait of Richard III whose lips, eyes and shoulder had been modified to make him appear to be the sinister hunchback that he was not.

Paragraph 3:
Finally, there are also numerous other convincing outcomes and suspects apart from Richard III. One key suspect is Henry Tudor, whose claim to the throne was not only exceedingly unconvincing, but he did not mention the princes until over a year after Richard’s death. If alive, the princes would have been a great embarrassment to the Tudors. Another suspect is Henry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham. While he appeared to support Richard, it was suspected that he may have been secretly assisting the Tudors. In this case, the princes’ deaths would have been of benefit. Another possible outcome was that the princes’ had in fact survived, as although their mother, Elizabeth Woodville, fought for their legitimacy, she never mentioned that they had been murdered.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the disappearance of the princes in the tower is of high significance and mystery in history. There are many pieces of evidence which prove Richard III’s innocence, including that he had a fine personality, much of the evidence against him was biased due to the Tudor reign, and that there were numerous other likely suspects and outcomes. Therefore, the convincing evidence leads me to strongly believe that Richard III did not kill the princes.

COPYRIGHT 2010 ihearthorse