The Battle of Bosworth Field changed history, paving the way for Tudor rule and a timeless legend of an evil king that still endures into the modern day. So what mistakes did Richard III make that resulted in his usurpation and death in August 1485? After all, Richard was king, and far outweighed Henry in numbers of troops, cash, local authority and royal power. So what happened?
His reign became known for brutality
Today, we spend a lot of time rightly trying to put Richard into the context of his time and see him as a human being, rather than as one-dimensional 'villain' of Tudor history. But there's no escaping that during his lifetime he had subjects murmuring about his behaviour. At the beginning of his reign he punished four men acting under Robert Rushe who had been in contact with Henry Tudor. He ordered them to be beheaded on Tower Hill. In 1483, just weeks after his brother Edward's death, Richard had his nephew's guardian, Anthony Woodville, imprisoned and later beheaded. Even at Bosworth he took George Stanley, son of Sir Thomas, as a hostage and threatened to kill him if his father did not fight on his behalf against Tudor, Stanley's stepson. Don't forget too, the spontaneous, surprise ambush and execution of Lord Hastings. Richard's reign quickly became known for its harshness and brutality, and although we can view it today in terms of Richard asserting his new-found authority, people would have wondered whether a new king might rule them more gently and benevolently. With a possible replacement waiting in the wings, they wouldn't care if this behaviour was temporary and was Richard's attempt to maintain power and order in his first few years. I agree that Richard has been cast in a biased and unrealistic light by writers since his time, but that these rumours were believed suggests that they also found them believable. Similar accusations against a character like, for example, Henry VI, would not have been accepted as truth and gathered momentum.
He underestimated (or was too lenient over) the subtle power of women
Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville conspired, in the summer of 1483, to unseat Richard from his newly-acquired throne. Although Elizabeth was watched by Richard's guards while in sanctuary in Westminster, a doctor, Lewis Carleon, visited her and conveyed messages between her and Margaret without suspicion, which resulted in the so-called Buckingham Rebellion of 1483. While the rebellion ultimately failed, it did result in a number of Richard's enemies being able to reconvene in Brittany to hatch a plan for Tudor's final invasion force to land two years later. That the two women could enter secret talks didn't seem to occur to Richard at the time. It is significant too that his punishment for Margaret, after discovering that she was corresponding with her son, was to seize her lands and order her husband to watch her. If he, Thomas Stanley, had been found communicating in similar terms with Tudor instead, it is fair to imagine that his punishment would have been more severe. The actions of other women in Richard's rise to the throne are a mystery, for example the thoughts of Cecily Neville, Richard's mother and his own wife, Anne Neville.
 |
| Richard III, Public Domain, British Library Collection on Flickr, 11221235456 |
He underestimated the power of a legend to bring people together
To many, Henry Tudor was the figurehead of an ancient prophecy that a Welshman would come to rule England. This legend formed a central part of Henry's campaign, as he marched from Milford Haven with the red dragon of Cadwaladr fluttering above him. The idea that this prophecy, said to have been uttered from Merlin's lips, put Henry's actions in terms of destiny and fate. It was no wonder Henry raised support as he marched through England to Leicestershire, with many eager to play their part in the achievement of this ancient prediction.
He went after the Woodvilles
Whether or not you consider Richard's actions in 1483 a personal attack on his Woodville in-laws, he certainly didn't reward them with gifts when he became Lord Protector, or even king. Instead, two of them were executed on dubious grounds, one was in sanctuary with her children and another fled the realm in search of Tudor. Richard did show lenience - for example with Katherine Woodville, the wife of the Duke of Buckingham, but his approach to the family suggests that he wanted to eradicate Woodville power and influence. The Woodvilles had risen in England under Edward from the 1460s because Elizabeth was married to Edward IV, and they had gained titles, advantageous marriages and important positions of royal trust as a result. If there were personal differences between Richard and the Woodville family, he chose to let these get in the way of politics. But could they have put their differences aside following negotiations that offered something in return after Richard was king? This may have provided him with more support, not only of the Woodville lords and ladies but of their allies, too. It is telling that Elizabeth Woodville had promised Margaret Beaufort that she would contact men close to Edward IV (and by association, also close to herself) to remove Richard from power. Without this, Richard may have gained some support.
He got tangled up in the Princes in the Tower affair
OK, so Elizabeth Woodville and her remaining relatives are not going to support a man who caused her two heirs to disappear and usurped Edward V as king. We could talk for hours about whether or not it's likely Richard had the princes in the Tower murdered on his command, or whether they were murdered at all, but the fact remains that they disappeared on his watch. Late fifteenth-century writers soon linked the disappearance of the princes - the sons of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville - to Richard's doing. Whether he had a hand in whatever happened to them or not, Richard never acknowledged or gave a reason for their disappearance, leaving open the opportunity to be made a scapegoat and cementing his role as a 'villain' in early Tudor literature.
He chose to be king in the first place
I generally feel that Richard would have been more successful and retained more support had he ruled England as Lord Protector under his nephew Edward V. He could then have pacified the Woodvilles and their supporters, and Henry Tudor would have been further down the line of succession. Ultimately, it was Richard's bid for the throne, and the methods used to achieve it, that alienated so many against him. Ruling as Lord Protector, he would have still had ultimate authority in the realm.
He waited too late to act
Richard seems to have been cautious, but might have changed history had he reacted sooner to two events. The first, Buckingham's Rebellion in 1483, resulted in an uprising of men, most of them with former attachment to his brother Edward IV. On the failure of the rebellion, many fled to Brittany, a gathering crucial for Henry's later attempt in August 1485 to take the crown. But chroniclers agree that Richard knew of the rebellion before it unravelled in October 1483, but chose to feign ignorance to give him more time to find out more about its key leaders. If Richard had acted sooner and quashed the rebellion in its early stages, it is unlikely Tudor would have seen the number of supporters in exile that he did. It might also have given Richard more chance to work to get them on his side. Another event was Henry's landing in Milford Haven. Nathen Amin, in the book Henry VII and The Tudor Pretenders mentions that Richard's lack of urgency meant that Henry could march through territories and gain new supporters, swelling the size of his army by the time he reached Bosworth. There was some confusion as to whether Henry would land in Milford Haven or Milford on Sea in Hampshire. Had he placed men at each port, or stationed himself between the two so he could meet Henry more locally very near his landing place, Henry might not have been able to gather the support that he did.
He failed to win the support of his subjects
During Richard's reign, we see people deserting him. Edward's household staff and supporting nobility flocked to join the Buckingham Rebellion of 1483, many of them leaving the realm; while at Bosworth, the military intervention of the Stanleys is believed to have swayed the result of the battle. The brutality of his rule, the harshness with which he dealt with people and his alienation of Edward IV's supporters, along with the Princes in the Tower mystery, meant that he could no longer rely on the support of those around him. It is interesting that Henry, learning of Richard's ruling style, chose instead to show lenience to many of Richard's former supporters, forged relationships with both Lancastrian and York nobility and cautiously rewarded those who had helped him achieve the throne. He also relied heavily on legend, and saw the value of appearing regularly in front of his subjects. Thomas Penn, in The Brothers York hints that there may have been a personality difference between Edward IV and Richard III. Perhaps Edward found it easier to win support, with a more relaxed and charming manner, while Richard was more suspicious or less outwardly confident and appeasing. Whatever the reason, Richard failed to win overall support for his reign, and this directly affected the outcome of summer 1485.
These are just some of my own thoughts on Richard III and his fall from power in 1485. Do you have other ideas? Add to the conversation in the comments below, but also please be kind - we're all here to figure things out together.
Liked this? You might also like my book Forgotten Women of the Wars of the Roses, a look at the roles of women - royal and non-royal - during the conflict. Order your copy here at the Pen and Sword website.
Interested in Tudor history? You might also like my second book, Power Couples of the Tudor Era, published by Pen and Sword Books, which explores the contributions couples made to their own times as well as how they influenced our own. Order your copy here.
Never want to miss a post? Subscribe to my newsletter here:
