In the late 1400's the House of York fought the House of Lancaster for the English crown. Because Lancaster's heraldic badge
was a red rose and the Yorks was a white rose, the long conflict became known as Wars of the Roses. The real lives of the
main participants of the Wars of the Roses will be displayed in this paper. In Shakespeare's Richard III the participants in the
Wars of the Roses were not suitably displayed. The participants in Shakespeare's Richard III were Henry Tudor, Clarence,
Edward V, Richard III; Queen Margaret will have their lives displayed in this paper.
In the Shakespeare play Richard III was depicted as a malformed mean, ill looking, tyrant. But this was not the case. Richard
III was a nice and handsome man. Shakespeare only did this so that Queen Elizabeth would be pleased with what she saw
when she went to watch the play. Because Queen Elizabeth was a Lancaster, Shakespeare wanted her family to look noble.
Richard III couldn't have been deformed as Shakespeare said that he was, because in real life Richard III was a knight that
fought in battles. He couldn't have been deformed if he were a knight because he would have to fight with his sword and shield.
www.yahoo.com search stated that in the play Clarence was a good guy who loved everybody, but in real life Clarence was
jailed and executed for committing treason. www.altavista.com search engine said that in the play, Shakespeare said that Richard
had Clarence killed so that he could have an uncontested line to the throne. Shakespeare also said that Richard killed young
Edward V and his brother so that he could be next in line for the crown. But that is not true for Richard really didn't do it.
There is a lot of speculation about rather Richard did it or not. There is more evidence supporting Richard. Some scholars
believe that Richard didn't trust the Southern English so he sent young Edward V and his brother up north to be guarded by
one of Richard's consultants by the name of Sheriff Hutton. www.richardIII.com stated that Shakespeare also said that Richard
married Lady Anne but later killed her. In real life Clarence, disguised as a guardian, hid her in a London bakery. Richard later
found her and brought her to a church sanctuary so that they could have a legal marriage, in which they later did. Shakespeare
also said that Richard was always plotting ways that he could become king such as killing his brother Clarence and killing young
Edward V and his younger brother. But this was not the case for it was Clarence and his cousin Earl of Warwick. There are
many inconsistencies concerning Shakespeare and Richard III. Shakespeare really put out a bad reputation on the Yorks
house, only to please Queen Elizabeth and the Lancastrian house.
Shakespeare illustrated Queen Margaret of Anjou also as a psychotic, insane maniac that was crazed by the lost of her
husband King Henry VI, and the fall of her Lancastrian house. According to www.geocities.com Margaret was a strong lady that
ruled the kingdom after Henry's failing intellectual health. After the death of her son she moved back to France and gathered an
army to take back the throne of the Lancastrian cause. She affiliated with the Duke of Clarence and the Earl of Warwick to try
and murder Edward. But Edward remained triumphant at the battle of Tewkesbury and incarcerated Margaret, and executed
Clarence and Warwick. Shakespeare said that she was allowed to traverse freely about the castle, spouting and prophesize.
According to www.encyclopedia.com Edward imprisoned Margaret. These are some of the mishap that Shakespeare claimed in
his play Richard III.
In Shakespeare's play Richard III Edward and his younger brother were killed by Richard's hitmen. In real life Edward V did
rule. Although his rule was somewhat short and nonexistence. The speculation of him being killed in the play I think was quite
absurd on the part of Shakespeare.
In real life Richmond (Henry Tudor) wasn't a benevolent lord. In English history he was known as the meanest king. He really
didn't kill Richard III it was his army that killed him. Shakespeare said that Richmond and Richard fought a one-on-one duel.
They really didn't fight a one-on-one because Richmond was a milquetoast. Shakespeare said that ha was true patriot that was
trying to free his country of the oppressor Richard III.
The Shakespeare play Richard III had many mishaps. In real life Richard III was a handsome noble king who was only came to
the throne to help his country. Shakespeare depicted him as an inferior tyrant who became king only by killing any and
everything that stood in his way of taking the crown. Like I stated before Shakespeare only did this to please Queen Elizabeth.
Queen Elizabeth was a Lancaster and Richard III was a York. So by portraying the House of York as a cruel power hungry
Plantaget family; to please Queen Elizabeth he portrayed the Lancastrian House as a hard working noble family who loved their
country. This could not be the case if you have people like Henry Tudor in your family whom was a coward that later became
known a "the meanest king".
Once Henry Tudor came to power and Richard III died in the war of St. Albans. Henry then married Edward V Sister
Margaret, which was a York. Now that both of the family's shared power of the English crown there was no need to battle
anymore. So the marriage of Henry Tudor and Margaret is what primarily ended the " Wars of the Roses".