The New Murrey and Blue blog

KING RICHARD III’S EPITAPH

, ,
, , , , ,

 

IMG_4399.PNG

A digital reconstruction of Richard’s tomb in Greyfriars with the epitaph.  De Montfort University.

_81953487_4.jpg

A digital reconstruction of what Richard’s Tomb may have looked like with the epitaph De Montfort University

 

IMG_4405.jpg

The tomb for which Henry Tudor paid the sum of 10 pounds 1 shilling in 1495

IMG_4403.jpgA digital view of Greyfriars with Leicester Cathedral shown in the background and now the site of King Richard’s reburial.  De Montfort University.

It is very well known that the winner gets to write the history.  That’s bad enough but they also, unfortunately, get to write the epitaph too.  According to Buck, Richard had an epitaph which is now lost but the text of which he published in his History of the Life and Reigne of Richard the Third, published in 1647.  The full details of Buck’s claim etc., can be found in John Ashdown-Hill’s article The Epitaph of King Richard III (Ricardian 2008, vol.18).  According to Buck the said epitaph, which was in Latin, translated as:

I, here whom the earth encloses under various coloured marble,

Was justly called Richard III.

I was Protector of my country, an uncle ruling on behalf of his nephew.

I held the British kingdoms by broken faith,

Then for just sixty days less two

And for two summers, I held my sceptres

Fighting Bravely in war, deserted by the English

I succumbed to you, King Henry VII,

But you yourself, piously, at your expense, thus honour my bones

And you cause a former king to be revered with the honour of a king

When in twice five years less four

Three hundred five-year periods of our salvation have passed

And eleven days before the Kalends of September

I surrendered to the red rose the power it desired

Whoever you are, pray for my offences

That my punishment may be lessened by your prayers.

I leave it to you dear reader, to decide whether this is true and honest translation of such an epitaph if there ever one existed.   It seems, as John Ashdown-Hill concludes in his article ‘less hostile’ than would have expected from Henry Tudor  – had he merely ‘mellowed as time passed’ or did he have another motive?   Its  a mystery as is so much from that period.  For anyone interested in reading Ashdown-Hill’s article in full, here is a link:

Subscribe to my newsletter

  1. aiewatson Avatar
    aiewatson

    I wonder if the date is significant – 1495. This is before the Perkin Warbeck conspiracy reached its climax, and before the death of Elizabeth of York. Records suggest that both had a very great impact on Henry VII’s state of mind and confidence. If you examine the tomb of Prince Arthur at Worcester Cathedral, there appear to be at least as many heraldic devices of the House of York adorning the shrine as those of Lancaster. After Elizabeth’s death, Lancastrian and Tudor iconography predominate, and the histories are commissioned blackening Richard’s name.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  2. mry4441 Avatar
    mry4441

    I have read that Henry’s motive in giving Richard a tomb was to suggest that Richard was a rightful king because he was in a panic because there was a possibility that “Perkin” really was Richard Duke of York

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. super blue Avatar
      super blue

      Indeed. As Ashdown-Hill goes on to say, Henry VII’s point was that nobody could consistently support Richard III during his reign and Richard of Shrewsbury later, because Richard’s parliament had confirmed his nephews’ illegitimacy.
      However, Henry’s Parliament had passed his Titulus Regius 1486, which reversed this.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply
  3. Kokomo Avatar
    Kokomo

    It tells us Richard was the true king!o

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  4. viscountessw Avatar
    viscountessw

    Henry always feared someone would come along and usurp him, just as he usurped Richard. What goes around comes around, and Henry was on the superstitious side. Perhaps he had visions of being accorded the same contempt that he’d accorded Richard. Mustn’t tempt providence, so he (Henry) pulled his socks up a little. A little insurance policy?

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
    1. super blue Avatar
      super blue

      Yes, he was playing off a dead Richard III against a live claimant.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply
  5. Esther Avatar
    Esther

    It was an insurance policy with lots of benefits. If Richard’s kingship was legitimate, then Bosworth made Henry king by conquest — he was G-d’s chosen (as shown by results). This might discourage people from joining Perkin.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply
  6. Justin L. Smith Avatar
    Justin L. Smith

    There’s some errors in John Ashdown-Hill’s transcription. For example, in his transcription of the College of Arms manuscript version of the epitaph, he misreads the Latin ligature representing a final -is suffix as a final -e.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment