In William Shakespeare's Richard III, Richard is portrayed as a sneaky, underhanded con man who is only interested in personal gain. Shakespeare had his own reasons for this portrayal. During his life, Elizabeth I was queen. She was a descendant of the Tudor dynasty, and the granddaughter of the man who defeated Richard at the Battle of Bosworth Field. This would not have sat well with the crown if one of their main enemies was depicted as a good king, or even a good man in general. Another factor of why he is depicted in that way is the fact that most of the histories available at the time were from the point of view of the Tudors, who saw Richard as their main enemy.
Traditional sources are those believed by the people, for example Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard would be traditional. Revisionist sources are from historians, or primary sources from people who were actually there. An example would be an account from King Henry VII of the Battle of Bosworth Field.
The Ricardian Society is a group with the goal to clear Richard III's name. They believe he was a good king. The Lancastrians want us to believe that Richard was a bad king with only a goal for personal gain. Lancastrians believe that they disposed of the main "bad guy. "
The passage from Vergil Polydore is Lancastrian because it is not sympathetic to Richard III. It points out all of his faults, and places the blame on his shoulders the disappearance of his nephews, although that can never be proven. Finally it points out he has William lord Hastings executed.
Horace Walpoles passage is Ricardian. The first sentence even says his reign was misinterpreted. It sites sources that say Richard was not deformed. It asks why historians of the time would have us believe Richard was a monster.
No comments:
Post a Comment