WHY Did Richard III Do What He Did?

[Avrorrange]

But why do it? Obviously, it was a completely boneheaded move, but it must have made some sense to Richard beyond just "power, power, ooooh, gimme dat power!" -- this isn't the Richard of Shakespeare, here; this is a real, flesh-and-blood human being, not a goddamn pantomime villain.

Opportunism is what I think it is.I really don't think being threatened by the Woodvilles and Edward V is the correct reason.Many regents in medieval countries have died in bed years after the regency had ended.The regents that didn't were generally disposed for good reason like threatening the King or trying to maintain power well beyond the end of their mandate.

As they say,power corrupts,it's precisely because Richard's a flesh and blood human being that he's vulnerable to things like greed.

 

[Mikestone8]

But why do it? Obviously, it was a completely boneheaded move.

Not necessarily. It was certainly a gamble but so it would be to accept the rule of a Woodville-influenced king. He may have felt he was between a rock and a hard place. And Clarence's fate can have done little to reassure him. This royal family was far more akin to the Corleones than to the Waltons.

Killing the Princes (assuming that he did it) was certainly a blunder, since it cleared the way for Lancastrian and Yorkist opponents to unite through a betrothal of Henry Tudor to their sister. But he wouldn't have been the first or last ruler to act first and think about consequences later.

 

[VVD0D95]

What might've happened had the Princes in the tower not disappeared?