How Did Richard III Survive
In December 1483 the bodies of Prince Richard and Prince Henry, only 12 and 9, were found murdered in the Tower of London. The mystery of who killed the boys is still a mystery to this day, however many suspect their uncle Richard III of York. Many historians who recorded the event explicitly express that they’re certain Richard III is responsible, and there’s many valid reasons to support their assumption. Richard III grew up with many siblings which included three older brothers. He was the runt of the family, so his chances of gaining power were very low. Into his adult life, each of this brothers were dying one by one until the death of his oldest brother, King Edward IV. Richard loved his brother Edward and looked up to him as a hero
…show more content…
He wanted to become as powerful as possible despite the competition he had. So when his oldest brother passed, Richard was the last one standing. The only living male sibling of the king, so the courts had no other choice but to anoint Richard as the next king. It was a dream come true for Richard, and it couldn’t have gone any more smoothly. However, what’s the point of having power if you won’t keep it? The boys were still young, so they weren’t an immediate threat to Richard, but perhaps the thrill of it all and knowing the fact they could succeed him in the future lead him to ambitiously kill off his remaining competition. It would have been no burden on his shoulders anyway, since Richard saw them only as the worst parts of his favorite …show more content…
This is understandable, since Henry Stafford was the right hand man of King Edward, he may have assumed he was going to gain the thrown, so he could have killed the princes to ensure he position. This is supported by his activism in the rebellion against Richard after he came to power. However, why would an adviser think he would become the next king, especially since Richard was still alive? If Stafford wanted the throne, it would have been more logical to dispose of Richard before they princes since he had more claim to the throne. Also, Stanford only had a problem with Richard, killing the boys wouldn’t have done anything for
He wanted to become as powerful as possible despite the competition he had. So when his oldest brother passed, Richard was the last one standing. The only living male sibling of the king, so the courts had no other choice but to anoint Richard as the next king. It was a dream come true for Richard, and it couldn’t have gone any more smoothly. However, what’s the point of having power if you won’t keep it? The boys were still young, so they weren’t an immediate threat to Richard, but perhaps the thrill of it all and knowing the fact they could succeed him in the future lead him to ambitiously kill off his remaining competition. It would have been no burden on his shoulders anyway, since Richard saw them only as the worst parts of his favorite …show more content…
This is understandable, since Henry Stafford was the right hand man of King Edward, he may have assumed he was going to gain the thrown, so he could have killed the princes to ensure he position. This is supported by his activism in the rebellion against Richard after he came to power. However, why would an adviser think he would become the next king, especially since Richard was still alive? If Stafford wanted the throne, it would have been more logical to dispose of Richard before they princes since he had more claim to the throne. Also, Stanford only had a problem with Richard, killing the boys wouldn’t have done anything for