Richard III S Capacity To Be A Good King
Woodpiles by persuading Elizabeth out of protective sanctuary and to attend court whilst paying her an annuity (Elizabeth was born into a Lancaster family and did marry a minor Lancaster noble before marrying the Yorkers king). He tried to end the war of the roses because they were unpopular with the kingdom and the nobles. This Is a clear demonstration of how he could have been a great king. This is because he Is trying to win over defected supporters and gain trust, popularity and an affinity with as many people as possible.
It also shows how he tried to gain affinity with the ability by gaining trust and showing respect to the Lancaster history. Some decisions that may have been questionable during his reign can be argued either for or against capacity to become a good king as a matter of Interpretations. Ruling through minor nobles such as Scrape of Bolton, Fiftieth and Grottoes show his capacity to be a good king as he knew that his relationship with more of the major nobles was poor and that he couldn’t trust them. By ruling through minor nobles he felt more secure and could easily manipulate them to do as he wanted.
If he tried to ass useful legislation, voting to give him custom duties for life to secure a steady income, whilst with the major nobles, they wouldn’t have co-operated as easily with him. So his relationship was much more productive and left him less vulnerable. However this also shows that he couldn’t trust people who could have helped him even more as they had more power and wealth. So he had no affinity with people who had more power, money and land, so therefore didn’t have a complete or majority rule over most of the country as he couldn’t trust them. The nobles didn’t rust Richard because of his lack of honesty in answering questions.
When he was accused of committing fratricide whilst his brother was in his care, he simply said that It wasn’t him. Other events similar to this led to no one trusting In a word he said. His war against Scotland was also another matter open for interpretation. His idea to go to war with Scotland was reasonable. He had enjoyed previous victories there This is because he didn’t plan on how to attack. He was so arrogant from his previous victories that he thought it would be easy so he didn’t prepare. In the end he spent much of his finances and lost many men.
This shows how far he had the capacity to become a good king because he had the great idea of fighting a battle he had previously won to gain a warrior like image an grow in affinity, but because he lost due to his arrogance and suffered greatly, this shows to what extent his good ideas were poorly executed. Finally his victory in the Bucking rebellion demonstrates his capacity to become a good king because he was seen as a warrior and an accomplished administrator. This shows his capacity to become a good king because after the Bucking rebellion the Howard brothers were given titles.
No great noble family felt confident enough to offer open opposition to Richard after the rebellion. This is because he won and was now seen as a great warrior. So although no major noble trusted him, they couldn’t act against him as he was now a proven warrior and a fierce and powerful opponent. The Bucking rebellion also showed his capacity to become a good king as he was seen as an accomplished administrator. He had financed a battle and after destroying the opposition he had more money to use. He also ran the North of England before becoming king so he had great experience in financial management.
This shows his capacity to become a good king as he managed the crown lands to achieve maximum revenue and passed a law ending unpopular benevolences. This shows how he had strengthened his position as a king both through crushing the rebellion and by financing his kingdom. In conclusion Richard Ill had the capacity to become a good king. He was seen as a warrior, a law-giver and as a great leader when in battle and for financially ruling the country. His only downfalls were the execution of vital events such as the battle with Scotland, how he usurped the throne and other suspicious events (fratricide).
By the mime he had come to power he was seen as untrustworthy and horrible man. If he had been more democratic, tactical and less treacherous when claiming the throne he would have had more support from the people, a greater affinity with major nobles and would have started his kingship with the upper hand. Losing the battle in Scotland also showed his incompetence and was seen as weak. However during his reign he made many good and wise decisions such as making amends with the Lancaster and therefore he did demonstrate to a large extent his capacity to become a good king but his reputation and planning let him down.