But for his usurpation, there is much to commend in the career of Richard III, 1470-85." How far do you agree with this judgement of Richard?.
Richard III, a wicked tyrant, an unscrupulous murderer, a deformed hunchback. Just some of the reputations and images that have been associated with this notorious king ever since his death on the fields of Bosworth. The one thing that is clear is that Richard III is the most controversial of all kings and this controversy may go some way to explaining his extreme reputations. There are two main reasons why he is lumbered with such a negative image, firstly of his own doing, the manner in which he usurped the throne, and secondly the manner in which Richards unscrupulousness" have been overemphasised by Tudor Historians. But without a doubt, there is strong reason to believe that if Richard III had won at Bosworth, not been killed, he would have gone on to reign England successfully. To argue this point, we must examine the positive things he did in his short time on the throne, but also his earlier life, and the personality that shaped him.
There is speculation that Richard had been planning the usurpation for some time, but he showed no sign of suppressing desires to become king. He could have had numerous reasons for deciding to do this. One, widely known, is his hatred of the Woodvilles. The Woodvilles had shown to be ruthless in their appetite for power and wealth, and so wouldn't have let Richard stand in their way. So some may say that as they would have influenced Edward V due to their close connection, and so letting them be so close to control, the throne had to be taken by Richard.
Undoubtedly, his usurpation caused disruption. He is the only usurper in English history to have deposed a king who had done no damage to his country. Usurping the throne in the name of reforming government, as others had done before him, was difficult to justify, but to depose a young king, of such a popular monarch, who had done no wrong, was indefensible.
