Richard and GoT

Dan Jones' article about GoT (including a plug for his new book) contains this sentence. The first three words are music to my ears "Brave, well intentioned, but doomed by his own mistakes and the swelling storms of his unhappy times, Richard was a dramatic figure long before Shakespeare got hold of him." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/game-of-thrones/10693448/Game-of-Thrones-the-bloody-historical-truth-behind-the-show.html Liz

Oh he must know something that we don't, he says that three Kings were killed H6 E5 and R3. There is no evidence to show that E5 was killed or even died before Richard.
Mary

Liz wrote :

"Dan Jones' article about GoT (including a plug for his new book) contains this sentence. The first three words are music to my ears
"Brave, well intentioned, but doomed by his own mistakes and the swelling storms of his unhappy times, Richard was a dramatic figure long before Shakespeare got hold of him.""

Carol responds:

Yes, but he also calls Richard "a king who stole the English throne, a king with a pronounced physical deformity, a king who benefited, at least for a time, from the murder of his 12-year-old nephew Edward V." Not music to my ears. Far too conventional a view for my taste--and rather at odds with "well intentioned." I suppose I should concede that "benefited from" is not the same as "killed," but nonetheless, it suggests that he initiated or condoned the supposed murder. Just what benefits he derived from the supposed murder, or, rather, the rumor of it, I can't guess. The only people who benefited in any way were Henry Tudor and his supporters.

Carol