Last words of King Richard III “This day I will die as a king or win” 10 facts you need to know about the battle of Bosworth

Battle of Bosworth Field ( photo: wikipedia.org )

Updated 05/05/2020 Last words of King Richard III

The battle of Bosworth, in which Richard III was killed, was the last significant clash of the Wars of the Roses. Here, Chris Skidmore MP, the author of Bosworth: The Birth of the Tudors, summarises 10 need-to-know facts about the battle that heralded the end of the Plantagenet dynasty and marked the birth of the Tudor age.

Richard III (play) - Wikipedia

For many, 22 August 1485 remains one of the key dates in British history. Yet what exactly took place in the early hours of the morning (the battle was over by noon) still remains tantalisingly elusive.

Portrait of Richard III of England, painted c. 1520 (approximate date from tree-rings on panel), after a lost original, for the Paston family, owned by the Society of Antiquaries, London, since 1828. ( photo: wikipedia.org )

Nevertheless, many myths surrounding Bosworth remain prevalent – stirred by the imaginings of Shakespeare, whose famous words, “A horse, a horse, a kingdom for my horse”, placed in the mouth of the defeated Richard III, are occasionally still recounted as part of the narrative description. Despite decades of research into what exactly happened at Bosworth, and where exactly the battle was fought, it seems truth remains inconvenient when it comes to telling a good story.

That shouldn't stop anyone knowing the basic facts of one of the most famous battles in English history, however. So for anyone interested in knowing as far as possible 'what happened', here are 10 key things to bear in mind:



1) The battle of Bosworth wasn't actually fought at Bosworth

It only became known as the battle of Bosworth from around 25 years after it was fought. Instead, contemporaries knew it as the battle of 'Redemore', meaning place of reeds. Other names for the battle included 'Brownheath' and 'Sandeford'.

Dadlington is located in Leicestershire ( photo: wikipedia.org )

The site of where the conflict took place has now been located two miles from the battlefield centre, close to the villages of Dadlington and Stoke Golding. The landscape would have been a marshy plainland (later to be drained), across which ran a Roman road.



2) It is hard to imagine the scale of battle sometimes


Richard III's army, at around 15,000 men, was approximately three times the size of Henry Tudor's army at just 5,000 men. Meanwhile the Stanley brothers 

Battle of Bosworth Field photo: tes.com 

Henry Tudor's step-father, Thomas Lord Stanley, and Sir William Stanley) had around 6,000 men between them. These numbers meant that the battle site would have had to stretch across several miles.


3) At the same time, Richard had an impressive military arsenal

Medieval cannon ( photo: wikipedia.org )

One account mentions 140 cannon, while the archaeological searches of the battlefield have found more than 30 cannonshot – more than any other discovered on a European medieval battlefield.


4) Henry Tudor had landed in Wales on 7 August, and had marched more than 200 miles into England

"This impressive portrait is the earliest painting in the National Portrait Gallery's collection. The inscription records that the portrait was painted on 29 October 1505 by order of Herman Rinck, an agent for the Holy Roman Emperor, Maximilian I. The portrait was probably painted as part of an unsuccessful marriage proposal, as Henry hoped to marry Maximillian's daughter Margaret of Savoy as his second wife".( photo: wikipedia.org )

Richard III had been 'overjoyed' to hear of his landing, confident that he would defeat the 'rebel'. So confident was the king that he even delayed leaving his base at Nottingham by a day in order to celebrate a feast day.


5) A novice when it came to battles, Henry Tudor remained stationed at the back of the field, while his forces were led by the Lancastrian general, John de Vere, the earl of Oxford, who also led Henry's vanguard

In between the two forces was a marsh, which Oxford managed to navigate around, keeping the marsh on his right, before launching an attack against Richard III's vanguard, led by the aged John, duke of Norfolk.

Right: Agnes Tilney, wife of Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk (1443–1524). On her kirtle she displays her paternal arms Azure a chevron between three griffin's heads erased or (Tilney) and on her mantle the quartered arms of Howard (1&4: Gules a bend between six cross crosslets fitchy argent (Howard); 2&3: grand quarterly first and fourth Brotherton second and third Mowbray). Below is inscribed in Latin: Elizabeta nat(a) Tilney ux(or) Thomae Howard ("Elizabeth born Tilney wife of Thomas Howard"). Stained glass in Holy Trinity Church, Long Melford, Suffolk( photo: wikipedia.org )

 6) It was Oxford's crushing of Richard's vanguard that began to turn the battle for Henry: Richard's troops began to desert him

In particular, his 'rear guard' – 7,000 men led by Henry Percy, the earl of Northumberland – stood still, and 'no blows were given or received', suggesting that Northumberland's men were kept out of the action. Perhaps they were unable to cross the marsh.

Coat of arms of Sir Henry Percy, 4th Earl of Northumberland, KG<br\ > Quarterly: 1 and 4, or a lion rampant azure (for Percy), quartering gules three lucies argent (for Lucy); 2 and 3, barry of six or and vert, a bend gules (for Poynings)<br\ > Henry Percy's mother, Eleanor Poynings, daughter of Sir Richard Poynings, of Poynings, was heir general to her grandfather, Sir Robert Poynings, 4th Baron Poynings. ( photo: wikipedia.org )

Alternatively, tales of Northumberland's treachery were rife. Later he was killed by his own supporters for 'disappointing' Richard. Whatever the cause, the fact that the rear half of Richard's army did not engage in battle left the king in real trouble.


7) Richard was offered a horse to flee the battle, but refused 

Last words of King Richard III 

“God forbid I yield one step”, he is reported to have said. “This day I will die as a king or win”. Richard spotted Henry Tudor's standards and decided to charge towards him with his mounted cavalry, perhaps some 200 men in total, wearing the crown over his helmet.

Late 16th century portrait, housed in the National Portrait Gallery, London. photo: wikipedia.org 

 8) The battle around the standards was brutal
All accounts attest to Richard's strength in battle. Even John Rous, who compared Richard to the Antichrist, admitted “if I may say the truth to his credit, though small in body and feeble of limb, he bore himself like a gallant knight and acted with distinction as his own champion until his last breath”.

Cover of the 1594 quarto of The True Tragedy of Richard III. ( photo: wikipedia.org )

Richard knocked down Sir John Cheyney, who at six foot eight inches was the tallest soldier of his day, while Henry's standard-bearer Sir William Brandon was killed. Richard's own standard-bearer, Sir Percival Thribald, has both his legs cut from underneath him, but still managed to cling to the king's standard.


9) It was only when Henry was in 'immediate danger' that the Stanleys – or rather Sir William Stanley – came to his aid, crashing into the side of Richard's men and sweeping them into the marsh

Sir William had nothing to lose if Richard had won – he had already been declared a traitor days previously. His wily elder brother, Thomas Lord Stanley, despite being married to Henry Tudor's mother, Margaret Beaufort, seems to have thought best to stay out of the battle altogether. When Henry was crowned on a nearby hill, one source reported that it was Sir William Stanley, rather than his brother, who placed the crown on Henry's head.


10) Thanks to the discovery of Richard's remains, we now know in detail how Richard must have met his end

One report puts his death down to a Welsh halberdier – the halberd being an axe-like weapon on the end of a six-foot long pole. The king's helmet seems to have been cut away (there are cut marks on the skull's jaw suggesting that the helmet's strap has been cut off) to expose his head.

Several gouge marks in the front of the skull seem to have been caused by a dagger, perhaps in a struggle. Then the two wounds that would have killed Richard include the back part of his skull being sheathed off by what seems to be a halberd; if this did not kill him, a sword blade thrust from the base of the skull straight through the brain certainly would have done the job.

Richard was then placed on the back of a horse, trussed up like a hog (his insignia) with his 'privy parts' exposed, to be taken to Leicester, where his body was put on public display.

The death of Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field, from an 18th-century illustration photo: wikipedia.org

In conclusion, Bosworth remains a battle with an enduring appeal: it is not simply a tale of defeat and victory, but also of treachery and intrigue. 

Memorial to Richard III until 2015 in the choir of Leicester Cathedral photo: wikipedia.org

But as recent discoveries have shown, the battle's own history remains very much a living one, with our understanding of where the battle was fought and how exactly Richard III died being completely transformed in recent years. The story of Bosworth, 529 years on, remains very much alive.


Other articles on the same theme:

• 9 unsolved historical mysteries ( Jack the Ripper,Mary Celeste Ship and did Richard III really murder the Princes in the Tower? )

• William the Conqueror's victory at the Battle of Hastings on 14 October 1066

• Top 10 Greatest Historical Warriors close to perfection and invincibility.

• King Arthur's Twelve Battles

Story source:


The above post is reprinted from materials provided by HistoryExtra. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

10 reasons to rewrite history

It is said that those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. Meanwhile, any historian will tell you that the past, often, is something that you did not want to relive it. Yet history, as we know it today abounds with myths and false personalities who have almost nothing in common with records or deeds attributed to them. Here are some of the major concepts that should be radically amended and that influenced people, wrongly, centuries or even millennia.

10. Eve had eaten the apple of sin

An apple a day keeps the doctor away, says a universal dictum. Yet, apples boasts one of the worst reputations when it comes to the myth of genesis and the first people fall into sin. Thousands of paintings, sculptures, works written or sung, it shows Eve eating of an apple and tempting Adam to taste the forbidden fruit of the same deity. Well, nowhere is mentioned in the holy

In fact, in Genesis, Eve is tempted by the "fruit of knowledge" found in the tree that grows in the middle of the garden of Eden. Nobody knows exactly who hypothesized the presence of an apple, as long as he could be anything: a pear, a pineapple, a mango or other fruit known to men. Moreover, there is the view that "the fruit of knowledge" or an apple if you prefer, is but a metaphor of "original sin" that would have landed the first humans.

9. Isaac Newton was hit by apple

We return again to the same apple, fruit which seems to dominate a good part of our history. Legend of the illustrious British physicist, Isaac Newton was hit by an apple while meditating in your own garden - reason to issue later theory of universal gravitation - it is one notorious. But even that failed enlightened fruit in the scientist's head?

Most historians agree that this story is just a legend. In reality, the story of Newton's apple appeared in an essay published opment, long after the world as the physicist had passed. Before that, Catherine Conduitt, granddaughter of Isaac Newton, was the only one who mentioned the story though, most likely, it was just a contrivance designed to attract good advertising on the survivors of the scientist.


8. Napoleon was a man of short stature

He remained in history as "Le petit corporal" - Little Corporal - reason enough for some to compare him with another "little corporal" of the twentieth century. One whose intentions to conquer the world have been broken and disastrous as all the gates of Moscow. Both were actually the same character, Antichrist, but this is a hypothesis (fantasy) that not going to treat it in this article. What interests us is how "small" was entitled Napoleon and how is the image acquired in history.

He said, over time, especially by the French king's enemies, as his ambitions to dominate Europe were the result of its low height, a complex that Napoleon tried to compensate by military victories. In fact, Napoleon had a height of 174 centimeters, far above the average men of the eighteenth century. Nickname "little corporal" came as a result of a habit of the French army, through which mocked their superiors in rank subordinates. This remained true even after Napoleon became emperor.


7. James Cook discovered Australia

If we had wanted to be demanding "to blood," we have said that Australia was discovered by Aboriginal ancestors somewhere about 40,000 years ago. About 40 millennia before James Cook to see the light of day. But we leave aside this theory (ironic) and turn our attention to the "rediscovery" of Australia, this time by European seafarers.

History tells us that James Cook first set foot on the current beach in Sydney, in 1770. What made but English navigator and geographer was to identify the east coast of the continent to the antipodes and perform its proper mapping . In fact, Australia has been reached for the first time the Dutch Dirk Hartog and Abel Tasman, followed by Englishman William Dampier, the same captain who abandoned him on Alexander Selkirk (aka Robinson Crusoe) on a deserted island in the Pacific. The myth of James Cook discovered Australia have added yet a concept that was grounded, erroneously, in people's consciousness. Any student learn today that the little continent was "uncovered" by "Captain" Cook. A serious mistake if we think that, in 1770, the Englishman was not more than a lieutenant in the British Army.

6. Shakespeare wrote "Hamlet"

It is known as the greatest writer and playwright who ever lived, and this despite the fact that nobody knows who he really was. Shakespeare is certainly a pseudonym, and the man behind or remained even today, covered in mystery. What is known, however, less is that his works are immortal, in reality, takeovers and adaptations of old stories.

Take, for example, the tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, written in 1603 - perhaps the most famous work of the illustrious playwright. Although the credit belongs entirely Shakespeare's Hamlet's story has its origins in an ancient Scandinavian myth of ... you guessed it, Denmark. The original has not been preserved, but we can say that the English version is entitled, however, the most successful.


5. America became independent on July 4, 1776

In any school in the world, the history lesson, the teachers will say that the independence of the United States was obtained 4 July 1776. In fact, July 4 is even US national day. Without mistakes we can say, however, that scientists rushed this date, and history textbooks should be amended.

After seven years of war between American States and Britain, King George III and US officials declared a cessation of hostilities on 3 September 1783. Basically, that day came into force the Act of Independence signed on July 4, 1776.


4. Edison invented the light bulb

Although it is one of the most prolific inventors in history (1,093 inventions), Thomas Edison is not the father in law of many of them. The reality is that some belong technicians who worked with him, while others have not even seen the light in his lab. Take, for example, the light bulb, the most famous invention of Edison. It was invented four decades before Thomas Edison was born. The author? English scientist, Sir Davy Hamphry. And yet, how he came to be recognized as a parent Edison's light bulb?

3. George Washington was America's first president

Everyone knows that Washington was the first President of the United States (of the 43 presidents in history). The reality is, however, different. During the American Revolution, the Continental Congress (or the US Congress) he chose Peyton Randolph as the first president. Randolph's first political move was to create an army to oppose England, and topped it even called him George Washington.

In 1781, Randolph was succeeded by John Hancock. After Washington's victory at the Battle of Yorktown, Hancock sent him a congratulatory American general, he answering them through another missive that is with the nickname "president of the United States." Eight years after the war, and after another two presidents, Washington, The benefits of the huge political capital gained through victory against England, he became the first democratically elected president. Strictly speaking, however, George Washington was only the fifth US president.


2.Ferdinand Magellan made the first trip around the world

Without going into details, almost everyone knows two things about Portuguese navigator large and wide, Ferdinand Magellan. The first is that made the first trip around the world (between 1519 and 1522). The second is that he was killed on 22 April 1521 by natives in the Philippines. It seems, however, that no one barely visible contradiction of terms between the two statements

1. Jesus was born on December 25

Christmas is the biggest celebration of Christianity, at which all celebrate the birth of Christ. There is, however, no mention biblical or otherwise indicating 25 December as the one in which Jesus was born. Currently, there are several hypotheses about the origins of Christmas, but perhaps the most important is related to the cult of the god Mithras Hellenistic, cult emerged around 100 BC

Its believers were convinced that Mithra was born on December 25 of a virgin mother, and that this event has happened in a manger. A striking resemblance more than the Christian celebration of Christmas. Many voices say that the early Christians tried to make people forget the powerful cult of Mithras, and so they replaced it with the celebration of Christmas. In fact, many other pagan holidays were changed, and in their place were adapted to Christian holidays.


The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Descopera . Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.