Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/147

RICHARD III. 127 RICHARD III. time in the north, but before his arrival at London lie was recognized by the royal coun- cil as Protector of the realm. He soon over- threw the unpopular party of the Voo<l- villcs, the IJueen's relatives, who aimed to control the Government, and finally impris- oned Edward V. and his younger brother. Par- liament thereupon declared that he was the rightful King, on the ground that Edward IV.'s marriage with Elizabeth Woodville was illegal. A deputation of lords and commons ])resented these conclusions to Richard, who assumed the crown on June 26, 1483. After his accession the King courted popularity with considerable suc- cess. He made a royal progress thr<mgh the midland and northern counties, -and was every- where received with joy and loyalty. While Richard was thus engaged in the nortli, plots for the rescue of the captive princes were being hatched in the south, and to end these conspira- cies Richard about this time probablj' had his prisoners put to death. The Duke of Bucking- ham, who was involved in these plots, thereupon planned a rebellion in favor of the Earl of Rich- mond, the Lancastrian claimant of the throne. A general uprising was planned for October 18th, which was to extend throughout Southern Eng- land and Wales, but the King's adherents re- pressed the insurrection in the south and cut the bridges over the Severn. The heavy autumn rains prevented Buckingham from crossing the river from the Welsh side, and the same storms frustrated the intended invasion by Richmond. Buckingham was taken prisoner and executed. The remainder of Richard's brief reign was spent in preparations for the final struggle with Lancaster. By wise laws and politic acts he sought to win the affections of the people, and by extensive military preparations to baffle the expected invasion. In order to unite the Yorkist party, Richard intended to marry his son and heir to Elizabetli. the eldest daughter of Edward IV.. and on the death of his son he proposed marrying her himself, but was obliged to re- nounce this plan on account of popular opposi- tion. On August 7. 1485, the Earl of Richmond landed at Milford Haven, and was joined by the Welsh chieftains in his advance on Shrewsbury. Richard hastened to meet him, and the hostile armies faced each other on Bosworth Field. When, however. Richard ordered the attack he found his troops half-hearted, and the Stanleys, whom he had summoned to his aid from Lan- castershire, joined the enemy. The result was that Richard was defeated and slain ( August 22, 1483), and the Earl of Richmond became King of England as Henry VII. There has been much discussion over the char- acter of Richard III. The chroniclers of the fol- lowing reign, from whom we have derived our knowledge of him, wrote to please the Tudors. They pictured him as a monster, both physically and morally, and the genius of Shakespeare has fixed this conception in the public mind. He is said to have been undersized and a hunchback, with his left shoulder lower than the right. His look was said by Polydore Virgil to be full of malice and deceit, and by Sir Thomas More to be warlike and hard-favored. But contemporary portraits, of which several survive, show a thoughtful, anxious face, and no trace of de- formity. A hunchback could not have performed the feats of valor which he accomplished at Barnet, Tewkesbury, and Bosworth. But of his unscrupulois character there can be no doubt, although many of the accusations of his enemies are unfounded. He and his brother Clarence were said to have caused the death of Edward, the heir of the House of Lancaster, afu-r the battle of Tewkesbury. But even it this be tfue there were many similar executions in the War* of the Roses. There is nothing to prove that he caused the murder of Henry T., or had any part in the accusation and conviction of his liVothcr Clarence. From all these deaths Edward IV,, and not Richard, was chief beiieliciary. The nuirder of his two nephews in the Tower was, however, quite generally ascribed to Richard's orders, and probably with more reason. But of the sMiiposed nuirder of his wife there is little likelihood. Miatever his moral character, he was certainly a ruler of great ability. His management of the Scotch war and liis govern- ment of the north before his accession to the tlirone brought him the greatest popularity, and his legislation after his accession to the throne was wise and beneficent. Bibliography. Letters and Papers of the Reigns of Richard III. and Henry V//., ed. James Gairdner (Rolls Series, 1801-63), which are the most important of the sources. Among the Tudor historians, consult: More, IJi.ilory of Kinfi Richard III. (new ed., Cambridge, 1833) ; Virgil, Anglim Hi-itoriarum Lihri X.WII. (new ed., Leyden, 1861) ; Fabyan, The New Clironieles of England and France (London, 1811): Ross, Historia Regum Angliw (Oxford, 1716). The best modern account of his reign is by Gairdner, Life and Reign of Richard ///. (Cam- bridge, 1898). The most elaborate defense of Rich- ard's character is Legge, The Unpopular King: Life of Richard III. (London, 1835). The question of the murder of the princes was discussed by Markham in the English Historical Reriew, vol. vi. (London. 1891), who believed Henry VII. com- mitted the deed. He was answered by Gairdner in the same periodical and same volume. RICHARD II. An historical tragedy by Shakespeare, written probably in 1595. and en- tered on the Stationers' Regi.stcr in 1597. Ex- cepting the adapted plays on Henry VI., it is the earliest of the historical plays, and the first printed. It was probably the play acted the night before Essex's rebellion in 1001. The sug- gestive deposition scene made it unpopular at Court, and it was suppressed by the censorship, being first printed in the Fourth Quart" in 1008. Several older plays on Richard II. had been written, but were not used b.v Shakespeare. The chief source of the tragedy was Holinshed's Chronicle, and its model was Jfarlowe's Edward II. Among the historical plays, it stands as a prologue to the dramas of Henry IV. and V^ RICHARD III. An historical tragedy by Shakespeare, written about 1595, and entered in the Stationers' Register in 1597, shortly after Richard II. An older play. The True Tragedy of Richard III., was published in 1594, but from this Shakespeare took only two lines. He fol- lowed Holinshed's Chronicle (1577), who took the sombre picture of Richard from Sir Thomas More's History of Richard III. Traces of a weaker hand can be detected, and it is supposed that ^Marlowe helped in the early part of the plav, which was finished and later revised by Shakespeare. Historically it follows closely oa