The Battle of Bosworth 1485 - The Climax To The Wars of the Roses

[@AndrewTheMandrew531]

Watching here from America! Medieval English history is so fascinating.

[@TheHistoryChap]

The more I study it the more fascinated I am too. Thanks for commenting an if you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@MattVanPerry]

Love your passionate telling of these parts of British history mate!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks Matthew. I think that there are some great stories to be told. Would love to get more viewers. By the way, If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@MattVanPerry]

@@TheHistoryChap it’ll come with time I’m sure, what I like the most though is that you include both victories and losses which is important for us as brits to remember that it wasn’t all plain sailing. Keep it up though mate!

[@rob5944]

I agree, but all a bit irrelevant now isn't it?

[@tedgreen6]

So glad that you've added the recent discovery of Richard's grave. Nice to see the photo of the regal tomb where he now lies. Terrific storytelling.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for watching and for your kind comments about my storytelling

[@justinneill5003]

Well a well narrated and descriptive account. According to Polydor Virgil, whose on temporary account seems to be the primary source of everything we know about the battle, there is another fascinating incident that occurred during the climax; when Richard charged Henry and his guard, it was he himself who not only skewered William Brandon the Standard Bearer with his lance, but went on to knock Johnn Cheyne, Henry’s personal guard, off his horse with the broken end. This detail is all the more interesting for the fact that John Cheyne was a giant of a man (the thigh bone exhumed from his grave indicates a height of around 6’7”) whereas Richard was of moderate stature and relative slight build, in addition to his severe scoliosis, as evidenced from his skeleton. It also demonstrates how close Richard must have come to Henry, possibly seconds away from achieving his goal and slaying his rival, before he was overwhelmed. Despite his physical limitations, Richard was in fact a seasoned warrior, having previously fought alongside his brother and father, and would have been trained from an early age in military combat, as was customary for the sons of noblemen. The mounted knight, securely seated in a deep medieval saddle, formed a single unit with his charging horse to produce maximum impact directed through to the tip of his lance, and Richard would have perfected this art in the lists on the jousting field. Over recent years, research was done using a man I similar size and build, and with a similar spine curvature; he was taught to ride and joust by a modern expert, and with the same type of equipment that Richard would have had, the result proved that the feat was entirely feasible.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Justin, Fascinating, thanks for adding to the story. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info Chris

[@donnajohnson6181]

Brilliant storytelling. So fascinating. Thanks.

[@TheHistoryChap]

My pleasure. Thanks for watching.

[@tvogel1810]

Thank you!

[@TheHistoryChap]

My pleasure. If you enjoy my work please join my weekly newsletter at www.thehistorychap.com

[@nicknameunavailable809]

Took the time to visit Bosworth on a business trip to the Midlands. Well worth the effort - extremely nice displays and helpful staff and volunteers.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Yes, a great site to visit.

[@dsullivan1988]

You are amazing Sir, you paint a detailed picture with your words

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you for those kind words. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@magnuslauglo5356]

@ The History Chap I've been long awaiting your take on Bosworth! Thank you so much :) As I've followed your Wars of Roses videos, I do have one question. We're used to being told that medieval warfare in general was a lot more raiding, pillaging, skirmishing, and sieges than large pitched battles. But over thirty years in the Wars of the Roses, there are a dozen or so major battles (and few large sieges I am aware of). Compare that to the 100 Years War or the Anarchy, which lasted much longer but had fewer big battles. To what do you attribute the Wars of the Roses being fought and decided by a comparatively high number of large and often decisive battles? Were competing Kings of England reluctant to attack civilians and make themselves unpopular among the people they aspired to be kings of? Was there less of a need for armies to live off of the land because they weren't going on as many long marches? Or other reasons? And why didn't castles figure in more prominently?

[@TheHistoryChap]

Really good questions which really deserve to be discussed over several pints! But here is a quick start: Maybe the Wars of the Roses was starting a transition from those small skirmishes to larger battles, probably because the key players were starting to access more troops. As for not attacking civilians, I think that pillaging certainly did take place (evidence from the Battle of Barnet) but my suggestion was that "the people" were insignificant and were therefore seen by the nobles as a sideshow whilst taking out their rivals in battle was more important. Chris

[@magnuslauglo5356]

@@TheHistoryChap Thanks for your response. Are you saying in part that, compared to earlier Northern European wars, the Wars of the Roses were characterized by larger armies overall, and that this lent itself more to shorter campaigns and risky decisive battles, rather than wars of attrition through raiding and drawn out sieges? Getting to talk military history with you over several pints would of course be a privilege :)

[@robg5958]

Thanks Chris, yet another cracking video.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks, Rob. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info Chris

[@delskioffskinov]

Thoroughly enjoyed that video! hung on every word! Thank You!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Very kind of you. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@davidmacnab5213]

Would love to hear your take on the fate of the Princes in the Tower. Richard's reputation as a brave and seasoned campaigner is well deserved; but the disappearance of those children is a blot that can't be wished away.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks David. I have listened to many different points of view and I can't help feeling that Richard is the prime candidate.

[@suleimanlauderyoung6833]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/qJLGdX2EjNN4eMk

[@redemptivepete]

I consider myself a Ricardian but sadly I have to agree. Are Richard's struggles and very vulnerable position he was placed in through no fault of his own any excuse? Even if events took him to the crown he must have known that deposed Kings always have to be disposed of. He was the protector of Edward V and if someone else actually killed the boys Richard still bears responsibilty for failing to do so.

[@richhughes7450]

Richard is poss most likely to have had the Prince's murdered and if so, he deserved to lose at Bosworth but he was always going to get the blame as they were in his custody at the Tower, so he would have known that the fingers of blame would point directly at him. It is possible that other people could have done this but who knows.

[@kennethrodda7358]

@@TheHistoryChap aaaq

[@roblennox1869]

Really do enjoy your videos. Very well put together. Can’t wait to see what you come up with next.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you Robert .If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@lloydpringle5626]

Brilliant presentation, I like how clearly and vividly you portray the details of events.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Lloyd, that is very kind of you, thanks.

[@bobsyeruncle5557]

Another great video! My knowledge of English history is growing nicely thanks to your excellent posts. Thank you!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Many thanks.

[@davidbruce5524]

well done Chris. I appreciate the layout of the troops on the map!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Hi David, I'm glad you enjoyed it. Maps do help (although sometimes they are hard to do).

[@groblerful]

Great stuff.Thank you.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@adt70hk33]

Again great work. Shame I've only just discovered your channel.... And yes I have subscribed.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for your support.

[@oldgoat142]

Excellent historical perspective, and equally excellent story telling. I thoroughly enjoyed this. My hat's off to you, History Chap!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Many thanks; glad you enjoyed it. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@petergregory5286]

Another of your programs which I’ve both learned from and immensely enjoyed. Regards

[@TheHistoryChap]

Glad you enjoyed. Thank you.

[@johnellacott878]

Thanks for sharing your fantastic knowledge mate, and greetings from Kingaroy, Australia.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks, John, glad you liked it. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@joebloggs4807]

Great narrative and as ever very well delivered

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you very much.

[@Stephen-gp8yi]

Great assessment as always keep them coming boss✌️

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you Stephen. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info Chris

[@stephenbesley3177]

An interesting story of this period is that of Margaret Beaufort (Henry Tudors mother). She had her own claim to the throne but the prospect of a female monarch was not considered a safe bet at that time and so she stacked her hopes on her son. If you read about her influence in the background and machinations to secure her sons ascent you will understand why she was the real power behind Henrys reign.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Indeed. She even helped his son, Henry VIII, choose his first Privy Council

[@tombogan03884]

@@TheHistoryChap In parts of America "privy" has a very different meaning. The outhouse. Maybe it's the same meaning after all. 😄

[@frankhood8563]

Very nicely done One small comment that would help out us yanks that or not really very familiar with the towns and places in England when you show the map of where everybody is at use a red arrow or white arrow to show the forces or the locations of the different families and or battles and deaths, I would like to see more of the map

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for your kind words and your suggestion. i will take that on board for my American cousins.

[@Italiana911]

Use Google Earth

[@erikM64]

Epic stories, well told - Very British ! Extremely high entertainment, and one learns so much at the same time... What about Caesars battle on the medway, or Grapius Mons in AD 83 ? (very early, but still..)

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for the votes for some Roman history. I will add to my (never-ending) list for future videos.

[@SNP-1999]

@@TheHistoryChap I think you will find that the military history of Roman Britain will be a popular subject for many of your viewers. Am looking forward to said videos ! Thanks and keep up the good work !

[@johnbeven9600]

This is my "A" Levels again..........many thanks

[@TheHistoryChap]

John, is that good news or bad? A level English literature killed my desire to read classic novels but A level History fired me up.

[@johnbeven9600]

Excellent news......Brain was rusty...now oiled

[@martinwarner1178]

Great video, thanks. I believe the Stanley's got their come uppance later, for their treachery. Peace be unto you.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for watching

[@hocestbellumchannel]

Ι almost find it hard to believe that a King who behaved so bravely during his final moments and was loyal and brave throughout most of his life would behave so cowardly towards his own nephews. Of course, this might be wishful thinking or romanticising, but I have a gut feeling that there is more to the story of the "Princes in the Tower" that was ultimately covered up. On the other hand, the only reason Richard lost at Bosworth was that most of his allies ultimately abandoned him at the most critical moment. It makes you think...

[@TheHistoryChap]

Interesting comment. Thanks for contributing

[@allanchurm]

back in the day family fought at bosworth part of the Stanley’s.... collis branch..we had a seal with the boars head on it ..( mother donated it to the derby museum )

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for sharing.

[@gazza2933]

York Forever! 👑 Thank Chris. 👍

[@TheHistoryChap]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@TheBlackPrince447]

Another great video, it's hard to believe King Richard lost this battle, maybe he thought that himself and underestimate the Tudor army.

[@TheHistoryChap]

It's strange how history records events as foregone conclusions when they actually could have turned out very differently. This battle is a case in point, as is Hastings.

[@MichaelDobran-is7pr]

I've read somewhere that during that 30 years, there was only a total of about 13 weeks of actual campaigning. Is this correct ? From Mick.D.

[@tedcrilly8411]

very well told....

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks a lot. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@fredazcarate4818]

Thank you Sir for another great video presentation and a wonderful narration.God bless you!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks; I'm glad that you enjoyed it.

[@red.5475]

My 16th great grandfather was William ap Yevan, my 18th great grandfather was Sir Owen Tudor and his wife, 18th great grandmother Catherine of Valois.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Nice piece of research. Thanks for sharing.

[@red.5475]

@@TheHistoryChap I should press my claim to the throne. 😂

[@drtimsmith]

Absolutely brilliant way of making history come to life! Well done. I agree with the comment below - what did happen to the princes in the tower? Was Richard the nasty man the Tudors say - as victors - or has he been besmeared, undeservedly. I think it's very difficult to prove (or disprove) events a long time afterwards. Indeed, we have seen many convictions quashed years later as evidence becomes unsound. What do you think... there was a rumour that Edward V was spirited away to live in the New Forest, and there are clues to his real identity in the local church... but who knows how true these stories are? Anyway, do please keep up the good work... !!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for your support. Unfortunately, I don't think Edward V was spirited away. I think he was disposed of.

[@laneoswego6989]

Superior story thank you

[@TheHistoryChap]

Glad you enjoyed it.

[@edklein5455]

Do you have a recommendation for the best book about the Battle of Bosworth?

[@minot.8931]

Richard wasn’t just found in a car park. The bays were marked with letters that spelled “Car Park” and Richard was found immediately beneath one of the letter R’s.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for sharing

[@barkershill]

Never seen that before . Where I come from everyone knows what parking bays are and there is no need to label them

[@briandubois-gilbert8182]

The medieval age (mid-to-late 15th century) dynastic conflicts between the rival royal House of York and the House of Lancaster was referred to as the Civil Wars by historians of that time. It wasn’t until the 19th century that the modern-day “romantic” term of the Wars of the Roses-to refer to that period-was first coined by Sir Walter Scott upon the publication of his novel Anne of Geierstein in 1829. Of course there was nothing romantic about that troubled period in England that was characterized by brutal, intermittent battles, executions, murder plots and switching allegiances among the nobility and monarchy that led to thousands of deaths. It was in the late stage of that bitter conflict that Richard then Duke of Gloucester, ascended the English throne in 1483 as Richard III upon the death of his older brother King Edward IV. Richard III’s accession and short reign as Yorkist King of England is shrouded in controversy that’s still being debated. The 2012 discovery of his remains (which burial location was unknown) in an archaeological dig in a parking lot in Leicester and a subsequent forensics study of his skull/bones spurred new interest and review of his life and legacy that his current supporters hope will rehabilitate his image and character that they claimed has been unfairly maligned and tarnished by then Tudor propagandists, loyalists and by writers like Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More who it was alleged needed to keep the patronage of the reigning Tudors and their influential allied nobility. But this perhaps, will be for another video and further discussion. I appreciate and really enjoyed your narrative of this battle.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for taking the time to add your thoughts, I really appreciate it. You are right about the term "Wars of the Roses" and, of course, the roses as emblems for each side didn't really get a mention until William Shakespeare introduced them. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@jessebartlett2325]

Good afternoon, History chap, have you managed to have a look at the book called: Billy ruffian: The downfall of napoleon and the HMS Bellerphon yet? And would love to hear your take on Sir Thomas Cochrane and Sir Sidney Smith please. Many thanks :)

[@TheHistoryChap]

Hi Jesse, Not had a chance yet. Trust me, I read a lot of books! Cochrane and Smith would be a good story and I will add to my (ever-growing) list.

[@avatardele]

Have you heard about the book 'daughter of time' which was written by Josephine Tey(a pseudonym)? Its fictional protagonist investigated the alleged murder of the two princes by Richard III,and its interesting conclusion was that Richard III was likely framed by the Tudor dynasty. If you think it's fairly plausible that Henry VII framed his predecessor,then the raison d'etre for Henry's 'invasion' has to be reconsidered. Maybe the intrigues of that era outmatch those that we see in modern day dramas.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Wasn’t aware of book. Thanks for bringing it to my attention

[@Italiana911]

My 13 times Great Grandfather, Sir Humphrey Beaufort was killed on 22nd August 1485 at the Battle of Bosworth.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Nice work on your family tree.

[@rickyb5499]

Excellent, very good factual detail and so well presented 👍👍

[@TheHistoryChap]

Many thanks.

[@jonathontroy1447]

I am curious I have read some studies that link the Hundred Years War with the Wars of the Roses. I would like to know if there really is a link and if it is the economic cost of the Hundred Years War.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Like most history everything does have a link. The two most direct links were that the English losses created some disgruntled nobles and equally importantly an army (quite literally) of unemployed soldiers who were to form the backbone of many noble armies in the Wars of the Roses.

[@jonathanmawdesley-thomas1863]

Another engaging account of Royal throne of kings , in this septered isle … and how the Plantagenet were usurped by the Tudors ( didn’t know they were Welsh 🤔)

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment too.

[@robertdeen8741]

Isn't this battle that moved the Blackadder family forward? I seam to recall that from my memory of British history.

[@TheHistoryChap]

"Run to the hills" "My Lord they are coming from the hills" "Run away from the hills" Still, possibly my favourite Black Adder episode.

[@nccamsc]

The Hundred Year war ended in 1453 and just 2 years later the War of the Roses began. No break for English folk.

[@TheHistoryChap]

There was a connection. A lot of unemployed soldiers returning from France.

[@harryshriver6223]

I do love the name Lord Strange, pretty cool if you ask me. Sometimes a long shot is the only shot, who knows what would happen if things went the other way?

[@TheHistoryChap]

English history is full of great names. Watch this weeks video about Admiral Nelson to hear another cracking name

[@drtimsmith]

As a corollary, Richard III's body was found under the library car park in Leicester. Yes, he did indeed have scoliosis, a curvature of the spine. However, if he was a true hunchback, he would have been an axe-man. Instead, he was reputedly a swordsman of some skill. Lots of things to ponder...

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for sharing.

[@gezzarandom]

The House Of York had everything in place to keep a solid grip on power until it imploded with the death of Edward IV. It was one of those what if, what if Edward lived. Plus what if Richard III didn’t act so rashly and didn’t try to kill Henry Tudor on his own?

[@TheHistoryChap]

What if? moments are fascinating.

[@EK-gr9gd]

(9:50) 150 pieces of artillery? That would be six short of the number Wellington deployed at Waterloo.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Interesting comparison, although I bet these cannon were more of a liability to the users!

[@EK-gr9gd]

@@TheHistoryChap Just the shere number is remarkable.

[@Pablo668]

Good re-telling of the battle. Richard III's character has been somewhat re-asessed in the last few decades, probably a good thing. For me English history got a bit more dull after the last Plantagenet. Under the Tudors though power became more centralised under the throne, and the Nobles could no longer have private armies under their own badge. This was very much a point of change from medieval England towards modernity in governance, with a few hiccups on the way.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for sharing that interesting perspective

[@tombogan03884]

Is the Stanley motto "Opportunity only knocks once"? In Latin of course.😁

[@TheHistoryChap]

I think they could survive pretty well in modern day politics, don’t you?

[@AnthonyBrown12324]

The best account I have seen of the battle I have seen. I don't think many of those with Richard were committed to the fight. Maybe Norfolk being killed was the beginning of the end. Certainly Stanleys intervention. I don't think Richard was well liked he should have taken better care of his nephews

[@TheHistoryChap]

thanks for your comment.

[@golden.lights.twinkle2329]

It seems a terrible miscalculation to go into battle not knowing which side a 4000 man army was going to join.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Says a lot about the twists and turns of this civil war.

[@mickharrison9004]

Only ever be one winner of this war the glorious red rose of the great Shire county of lancs and the house of Lancaster 🌹

[@grahamepigney8565]

How did this change England forever anymore than, for example, the Battle of Hastings, or the defeat of the Royalist forces by the Parliamentarians? One of those involved invasion and subjugation of the English nation the other changed forever the balance of power between the Monarchy and Parliament.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you for taking the time to comment. And this one changed dynasties. The Tudors changed England and Britain.

[@richhughes7450]

Us Richards are known for our impatience and impulsiveness. If he had only stopped and had a think before his onwards to glory charge.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for taking the time to comment

[@richhughes7450]

Well, the what ifs keep coming but had Stanley not turned coat or stayed out of it, Chances are Richard would have won. Could you tell me, the huge casualties Richards army sustained... Why was that. Were they hunted down after the battle or was the killing done in battle?

[@highlandrab19]

Surprising there was anyone left after all the battles and killing

[@TheHistoryChap]

I once coloured in royal family tree to show who was killed. There were a lot of colours!

[@consulman233]

Although descended from the Norman's could it be said that Richard was the last English king of England as all that followed weren't ie Welsh, Scottish, Dutch, German,. Just a thought. Having said that I suppose you could also say the same for another king killed in battle and that was harold Godwin son at Hastings. As England itself had only existed for a short time in 1066 even though Harold was a saxon he would have effectively been English.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Interesting thoughts, Frederick. I think the last English/British monarch with two English-born parents was Queen Anne. I have a feeling that Harold's mother was Danish. It's all so complex!

[@bethwilliams4903]

Just a few points to add: Henry of Richmond brought Norman mercenaries (Anne de Beaujeu, Regent of France was backing him with men, ships, money, at least until he served her purposes) they brought with them the Sweat, a highly infectious disease that ran thru the English population that summer into fall (it would return several times before disappearing, something of a medical mystery to this day), what it did to the London population is well known, what it did to Richard’s army, especially those mustering or en route is not well known (certainly not studied); next, Henry had no real world battle experience and did NOT fight at Bosworth, once the men in front of him went down under Richard’s oncoming assault Henry was quite literally done for - at most he was only yards away from death, which is prob why William Stanley, or the men under his Welsh pikemen (Rhys ap Thomas) attacked the king from behind, not a frontal attack, but brought him down (prob already unhorsed) and by now surrounded from behind by pikemen who attacked him where they could not be seen - (not unlike the maneuver Captal de Buch used to destroy the French king, Jean, at Poitiers in 1356, also at the critical juncture when the English were losing - attacking Jean’s forces from behind, in a surprise - no chivalry here! - a move that decimated the French). For those who feel Richard should have won that battle they are correct, had it been fought under normal circumstances - both Stanley and ap Thomas were among Richard’s retainers, coming from behind it was an act of treason and betrayal. A very significant determinant in Henry’s future to never personally fight any battle again nor allow the nobility to have free autonomy - they would be required to provide extensive bonds, recognizances, sureties for their loyalty to him - despite numerous rebellions that he would face he wasn’t about to lead men into battle on his own behalf. Bosworth taught him you couldn’t trust your own troops, anyone could be bought (as he had bought off William Stanley, then later executed him when he supported Warbeck in 1495). As to the Princes, Richard moved them out of the Tower when his northern troops came down (well after they had been summoned and in harness so outdated that Londoners laughed at them) Richard went out to Finsbury Fields to review and talk with their captains - disguised as esquires the 9 and 12 yr old nephews were easily conveyed to men awaiting them in the crowds - very likely Edward was sent with one ‘minder’ and the younger one, Richard, prob with Tyrell. Once they were rendered legally illegitimate they posed to threat to Richard but they were in danger from exploitation by others - during May thru July 1483 there were numerous plots against and for - allegedly - the capture of the boys, even if it meant torching London to get them, at least two plots were the work of Margaret Beaufort, Lady Stanley. Richard numerous nephews and nieces in his care, not only the two well-known sons of his brother Edward. To believe that there is no complexity in the situation of summer - fall 1483 is to have virtually no understanding of the details of the period, the individuals involved or the stakes.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you for taking the time to pen your in-depth comment.

[@trailingarm63]

I've just posted my supposition about Bosworth and was intrigued by yours. I've read (I think) all the available sources about the battle and they don't amount to very much. If Henry's mercenaries really did bring an infectious disease with them, surely the effects would be far more pronounced in Henry's army - in which they marched and camped - rather than in Richard's? Henry's martial experience was irrelevant by 1485. This wasn't 1066, the medieval age was passing to modern and kings and claimants would commonly appoint military men to direct their battles. Oxford led Henry's forces well against the ageing Norfolk. Henry's only challenge was to remain alive which he was smart enough to do. He was fortunate to have an exceptional supporter in Rhys ap Thomas who was not intimidated by Richard's charge. Being engulfed by foot-soldiers when a charge fails could be the lot of any cavalryman in any battle. I think your point about being attacked from behind is too silly to merit debate - it's a battle not a croquet match. Likewise the amount of smoke you make in trying to obfuscate the murder of the Princes in the Tower. Would Elizabeth Woodville have seriously agreed to her daughter marrying Henry if she believed Margaret Beaufort or anyone close to her had killed her two sons? The arranged marriage turned into a love match. They had seven children and Henry was inconsolable when she died. I would also note Henry's treatment of "pretender" Lambert Simnel who was given a job in the kitchen and then a post as Falconer. These facts hardly fit the profile of a bitter and twisted conniver as die-hards in the Richard III society like to portray him.

[@longyx321]

Excellent....later England and Wales were joined by the Tudors but Welsh Nationalists still complain about not being represented on the Union Flag, ignoring the fact that Wales put a king on the throne.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for taking the time to comment, Phil. If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@Hinata.Sakaguchi]

Henry tudor the Pretender just stand there while Lord Stanley took the Crown for him. King Richard is still the best! he fought until the end like a true warrior King!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Maybe, but then it is no good being brave but losing your throne. How history could have been different. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[@Isildun9]

Richard may have had no sons or brothers to pass the crown to, but he did still have a nephew. Edward Plantagenet, Earl of Warwick, son of George Plantagenet Duke of Clarence, the middle brother between Edward IV and Richard III. Unfortunately, he would spend essentially the rest of his life imprisoned by the Tudors before he was executed on (likely false) charges of treason on November 28 1499, thus ending the House of Plantagenet in the male line. It was thought at the time that the real reason for his execution was a response to pressure from Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, the parents of Catherine of Aragon who was to marry Henry's heir, Arthur. Catherine was reported as feeling guilty about his death, and believed that her trials and misfortunes later were a result. Warwick was only 24 when he was executed, and had been imprisoned in the Tower since he was 10.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Mike, you are correct that Edward was a potential leader. He did, in 1485 have 2 major problems. Firstly he was just 10 years old so not in a position to lead an army. Secondly, his father had died a traitor and the custom was that the attainder on his father barred Edward from succession (although Parliament could have reversed it).

[@Isildun9]

@@TheHistoryChap True enough, though if Lancastrian and anti-Richard Yorkist supporters were willing to overlook Henry Tudors extremely tenuous claim through his descent from Edward III through John of Gaunt and Kathryn Swynford, overlooking a treacherous father for a legitimate son should have been easier. Granted, there's nothing simple about medieval politics, especially where Royal succession is concerned. He was, at least, confirmed as Earl of Warwick in 1490, as that title came from his mother, Isabel Neville, daughter of the Kingmaker himself. After his death, the Yorkist claim was continued, I believe, through the sons of his aunt Elizabeth, the sister of Edward IV and Richard III.

[@ladylove9303]

Richard lll was betrayed by his sister in law Elizabeth Woodville and her niece Elizabeth of York , and the very cunning mom Margaret Beaufort she was very desperate to put her son on the throne despite the fact that Tudors claim to the throne was weak , Margaret Beaufort husband Thomas Stanley and his brother the other stanley guy betrayed Richard during the Battle of Bosworth . Margaret Beaufort or the Duke. Of Buckingham are on the list of suspect who did the deed on the Princes in the Tower Margaret has the most motive she's clearing the path for her son Henry . Why it seems like Elizabeth Woodville and her daughter Elizabeth of York kept silent on the missing Princes.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Interesting thoughts.

[@3grumpyoldbikers]

Richards white horse was called White Surrey

[@TheHistoryChap]

Justin, thank you for taking the time to share.

[@avnrulz8587]

Where was Edmond Blackadder?

[@TheHistoryChap]

Relieving himself if I remember. And then King Richard tries to take his horse 🤣

[@dhchilton3323]

For what you describe as a rag tag and rather unenthusiastic bunch, the Welsh - from your numerous references to acts of theirs - do seem to have played a rather prominent role in this battle.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Certainly some of them did.

[@alancoe1002]

Chandée and Bernard Stewart had some excellent mercenaries at Bosworth, probably the best and most cohesive units there. Trained in the latest infantry tactics, as well as more handgunners than was previously assumed, according to Dr. Foard's exhaustive research at the new battlefield site. Thanks.

[@robertotamesis1783]

The was a Japanese battle that ended same way , a young warlord did he commit his army his late father's ally .

[@TheHistoryChap]

I never knew that, thanks. By the way, If you haven’t already, please make sure to subscribe for future videos. kzbin.info

[@robertotamesis1783]

Battle of Sekigahara.

[@BluespotKneeClinic]

Does this mean that the Tudors are illegitimate holders of the crown?

[@TheHistoryChap]

Well, ask any member of the Richard III Society and you will get an opinion!

[@gazza2933]

You bet! 😁👍​@@TheHistoryChap

[@johncorrall1739]

1485 was the end of the Middle Ages in England.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for sharing your perspective.

[@donallally4892]

The real question for me is did King Richard murder or have the Princes murdered in the Tower?????

[@TheHistoryChap]

Great question - seems to get people very heated.

[@thomasrobinson4401]

👍

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks, Thomas, glad you enjoyed it.

[@wilsontheconqueror8101]

If your King of England & and an invading army arrives. Don't ride into the middle of it!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

[@eccehomer8182]

Great mini-documentary, but... "The battle that change England forever". Did it really? I suppose every event changes something forever, butterflies and hurricanes and all that. However, in reality The Battle of Bosworth Field just replaced one robber baron with... another robber baron. Still, at least we're not Catholics! 😆

[@TheHistoryChap]

Of course lots of "game changers" in history but no Bosworth = no Tudors = no break with Rome = no Spanish Armada etc etc.

[@davidedbrooke9324]

It did indeed change the course of England

[@phimien2426]

Tiep tuc bu chuoi roi!

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[@trailingarm63]

You're taking too many liberties with what is actually known about the battle - albeit for the sake of telling a good story. Regardless of where your allegiances lie, the picture is about 20 per cent fact, and 80 per cent supposition. For what it's worth my supposition is that the outcome was decided prior to the battle. If everyone was trying hard (like at Towton, for example), casualties would have been much greater and Richard would have prevailed through superior numbers and weapons. You're right that Henry was a good anti-Richard candidate. The latter's murder of the princes and power-grab was repulsive to all but the most fervent of his supporters. Henry's (or his mother Margaret's) promise that he would marry the lost princes' sister to unite the country offered hope of unification to an aristocracy sick of dynastic intrigue & slaughter. Margaret Beaufort or possibly Uncle Jasper (Tudor) must have communicated with Northumberland who did as little as possible at Bosworth, likewise with The Stanleys, who only committed themselves (I believe) when Richard was surrounded by Henry's bodyguard. Oxford had led Henry's vanguard vigorously against an ageing Norfolk (60) who was soon fatally injured. Richard's charge was a desperate one because he realised his support was ebbing away. Unfortunately for him, Henry's bodyguard was not intimidated and had plenty of long weapons (pikes, halberds, etc) to fight mounted warriors. I suspect Rhys ap Thomas (a very able soldier and administrator, knighted on the battlefield) either dealt the fatal blow, or was credited with it because it came from one of his men. The contemporary Welsh poet, Guto'r Glyn praised Rhys, at his court, declaiming: "He killed the boar, shaved his head." The phrase is remarkably appropriate, given the (modern-day) analysis of Richard's skull and Glyn probably got the story from one of the Welsh soldiers involved.

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you for your in-depth comment.

[@Pyjamarama11]

ROYGBIV

[@TheHistoryChap]

Thank you for taking the time to comment.

[@craigdutton6924]

Sounds very English a charging boar

[@TheHistoryChap]

Great symbol!