R3 (History Plays, Book 7)

Afterword

This novel is based loosely on Shakespeare's history play, Richard III, and the chapter titles are quotes from the play.
Neither this work nor Shakespeare's play are particularly (at all) historically accurate nor are they intended to be. This novel's Richard perpetrates the same or similar crimes to PlayRichard. First off, I love Richard as a character, he's one of my favorite literary characters and this is in no way intended to be insulting of him or wheelchair users. This Richard is a victim to an extent of his upbringing as much as Buckingham and Richmond are, and I extended Richmond's character to paint his flaws as well. The magic of Shakespeare's play is that honestly you are on Richard's side throughout it, and I personally do in fact pity Richard at the end. His end is gruesome and the haunting scene is chilling.
In reality, Richard III was no less homicidal than basically anyone else in the War of the Roses,  in fact he seems to be a pretty regular, fair guy. There is no real evidence to suggest he murdered Anne, or the Princes in the Tower, or his brothers, or anyone outside of the battle field. The Princes bodies were only discovered after Henry VII (Richmond) took power, and at that point they were mere skeletons. Ergo, they may not have even been the princes. If in fact they were, Richmond and Buckingham are in fact more likely suspects in their murder than Richard, as Buckingham and Richard fell out around the time the boys disappeared from the public eye, could this be because Buckingham acted on his own and Richard in fact wanted his nephews alive? Maybe, maybe not. Buckingham and Richard's real falling out remains a mystery, but definitely speaks of a personal if not lover's quarrel. Buckingham had near equal claim to the throne as Richard, supported his cousin unwaveringly for years, only to strangely turn on him after Richard was in power. Richard did not kill Buckingham himself, his supporters executed the duke after he betrayed Richard.
The real Richard did have scoliosis of the spine, but experts conclude it was probably fairly minor, and didn't limit his movement in any way. This novel follow's Shakespeare's characterization that Richard is severely disabled. Doctors have concluded that the disability based off his skeleton appears so minor, he may not have had visible spine curvature. I doubt that, because if it wasn't visible to the naked eye, why did he go down in history as having physical disabilities? We'll never know for sure, and again, the Tudor's record keeping was flawed at best with regards to Richard's life. He did, however, attend knighthood training and was the last British King to die in battle, ergo he was clearly able to ride a horse and perform some level of sword play and other physical feats.
The real Richard did die on Bosworth's field of a severe head wound, however he sustained numerous other injuries and after his death experts believe he was run through with a spear and his body otherwise desecrated, which is kind of sad considering again, he was not strictly the worst person involved in the War of the Roses, nor was he even a bad king during his short reign. For all accounts he cared about his wife, Anne, with whom he had a young son who died probably from the same fever that took Anne not long after. Richard never remarried, and he and Anne knew each other as children, though they did not marry until they were adults (unlike Buckingham and Catherine Woodville, who married at the ages of 10 and 8 respectively). Anne and Richard took in several wards who were orphans of the War of the Roses, including George, Duke of Clarences son and daughter, potentially including the lost princes, who may have in fact survived and been evacuated by Richard prior to his death.
In fact, the only deaths that Richard was possibly directly responsible for in reality were probably Henry VI and his older brother Clarence, but it's muddy as to whether those were his idea, or Edward's, and they were relatively self-defense measures so far as the things went. Also when Henry VI died, Richard was eighteen, he wasn't making command decisions. Clarance was executed there's no reason to believe Richard was really at all involved, and if anything all three brothers killed Henry VI (there's no real reason to assume they did, that's folklore). Edward did in reality die of natural causes. Subsequently, Richard had the princes in the tower declared illegitimate and claimed the crown. While he was definitely intelligent and possibly ruthless, as a young man he witnessed his father's death at the hands of Henry VI's supporters, which probably had a profound effect on him.
We have no clear evidence as to the nature of Richard and Buckingham's friendship. It's mere speculation that they could have been lovers, but homosexual relationships of that nature were not strictly uncommon at the time. Buckingham's support of Richard, and subsequent falling out, is dramatic, but it should be noted that while Richard married late and had only one child, Buckingham had an arranged marriage and several children (though he was reported annoyed at the marriage and thought it beneath him). All of which points to a falling out of a highly personal nature, given that he endangered his whole estate by turning against Richard. We'll never know for sure his reasoning, though I personally doubt that either one of them would have felt strongly enough solely about the Prince's lives to go against the other after all they'd been through to get Richard the crown. The boys were Buckingham's nephews as well by marriage, so his affection for them is possible, but seems improbably, as does the supposition that he acted on his own to kill them, angering Richard.
Anne Neville, in reality, was only four years younger than Richard. Richard and Buckingham and George were wards of her father, Richard "Kingmaker" Neville Earl of Warwick and attended knighthood training at the Neville estates. When Richard was 12 and Anne 8, Warwick began splitting from the Yorks, eventually marrying Anne to Edward, the son of Margret and Henry VI, when he was sixteen and she was about thirteen. After the Yorks defeated Henry VI and executed the young Edward, and Warwick, young Anne was a widow, under the care of her sister Isabel and her husband, George York Duke of Clarence.
Because of the wording of the Neville estate, it was to go to Isabel and Anne's future husbands, ergo it was in George's best interest for Anne to remain unmarried and the entire estate to remain his. To this end, he hid her in his house, according to some reports, he wound up hiding her in an inn posing as a maid. Richard tracked her down, writing his brother multiple letters requesting her location, and offering to forgo any claim she had to the estate for her safe return and hand in marriage. Whether they were childhood sweethearts, or this was just protective affection for his cousin, we don't know. However, he did marry Anne when she was sixteen and he was twenty (not a really bad age gap for the time). We know very little of Anne's thoughts of this, but we can assume they were relatively happy together. While Richard was rumored to have had affairs prior to the marriage (again, fairly common at the time), he had none after (unlike his brothers), and we do have some Anne's correspondence with his Richard's mother, discussing a book they were both reading, which would imply that she was fairly comfortable in their life. When Anne was seventeen, her and Richard's only child, a son (Edward) was born.
Edward would remain an only child, until Anne and Richard would adopt their orphan niece and nephew after George's death. Edward, sadly, would die at the age of ten, after which Anne wrote to Richard, asking for them to formally adopt their nephew as the new heir to the throne. The couple would also take in Edward IV's daughters. Sadly, five months after her son's death, Anne would also die of an unknown illness. There is no reason to believe Richard killed her, as they were apparently quite happy, and he'd already declared an heir to the throne, ergo he didn't need to remarry in order to have heirs.
Similarly, this strengthens the case that he and Anne were innocent of the deaths of the Princes in the tower. Why kill them then name another nephew as heir? It makes little sense. Moreover, Anne's personal ledgers show various notes regarding care of 'the children' when theoretically her son should have been the only child in the house. This would imply that the Princes in the tower were still alive and simply under the King and Queen's care. Similarly, there are notations in Richard's ledgers from when he was king, of payments going to a 'bastard'. Scholars suppose it's a child from before he and Anne were married, however it just as likely could have been one of his brother's children, or even the princes, who by then were considered bastards.
It's hard to know for sure, but another clue that the boys either survived longer than we originally believed, or were put into hiding, is the fact that Lizze York, and the other York princesses, were by all accounts happy enough to remain in Richard and Anne's court, moreover their mother let them go to court, something she wouldn't have done if she truly thought the boys were dead under mysterious circumstances.
After Anne's death, it's rumored Lizze wrote to her maternal uncle, asking to be given permission to marry Richard stating that she thought he was 'the only man who could ever be kind to her'. This letter has since been lost nor do we know if it was even Lizzie's, however if it did exist that basically disproves that Richard was in any way responsible for the murder of her brothers. Also, it doesn't even imply any sexual attraction on either side. It would have been a marriage of convenience for both, and we don't really have any evidence of Richard playing the field, he and his wife had one child, and he either married Anne out of duty or because of a childhood crush. Compared to marrying, say, Henry Tudor, her uncle whom she had seen to care for her sisters (and brothers?) would have been a logical choice, especially if she already knew from living with him that he wasn't going to make (unwanted at least) sexual advances on her.
Lizzie was only twelve years younger than Richard, and it wouldn't have been unheard of at the time to marry one's niece, however when rumors circulated Richard angrily contradicted them, reports at the time stating that he became 'enraged' at the idea, moving Lizzie from court to dispel the rumors, and sending out correspondence to find her a husband and inquire about a political marriage for himself. Some see this as guilt, I personally don't, because he really could have married her if he'd wanted to considering he was, you know, King.
To an extent I hope the letter was not real, because if so it meant that Lizzie already had cause to fear other men, which speaks of something awful happening to her in her father's court. Edward IV was not known for keeping great company or being a great person in general, so there's that. Whatever the truth, we do know the girls willingly went to Richard and Anne's court and there is no reason to believe they were unhappy there.
All this brings up another mystery, and that is little Edward and Anne's deaths. Very sudden, and very near the end of Richard's reign when things were already going south so far as the Tudor invasion. Anne was buried in an unmarked grave with no public funeral, and while Edward had a funeral, researchers have since discovered the boy's grave is empty. There are explanations for either occurrence, however with the Princes from the tower vanishing as well, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that Richard and Anne arranged to hide her and the three boys, all York heirs to the throne, from Tudor hands should things go poorly at Bosworth field. Anne had already been in hiding as a commoner before, and as orphans of the War of the Roses themselves, it wouldn't be surprising if Anne and Richard, sensing the changing tide, chose to hide the boys and Anne rather than have them executed or worse at Richard's defeat.
The York girls wouldn't have been a threat and Lizzie York was already engaged (by her mother) to Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, ergo she was going to survive either way. Could the strange disappearance of Richard's entire family have been a plot to save them? I personally find it more likely than previous explanations. Was it successful? We'll never know if Henry Tudor executed them quietly later, or if they escaped England and lived in relative peace.
Speaking of Lizzie York (called so to differentiate from her mother, historically we don't know if she was called Lizzie), when Henry Richmond (who was in his late twenties, at 28 closer to Richard's age of 32 than her 19 years) rolled in she can't have been pleased, not if her letter did exist and she felt safe with her uncle (which after basically everything that had ever happened to her and her family, I would tend to agree, Richard was one of the few people who was going to be kind to her). Henry Tudor Earl of Richmond waited a year before he and Lizzie were married, but thankfully by all accounts they had a reasonably happy marriage. Their personal diaries show plans to spend time together, and Henry VII often allotted money to buy her presents and such, she was fond of games and cards, it's rumored the queen of hearts he commissioned to be after her likeness. After her death, he never remarried and his health deteriorated.
While Shakespeare's play and this account are entertaining works, do not doubt that they are fiction, and while Richard's character has been heavily fictionalized into a fascinating character study, it does not reflect the real person. Richmond, Buckingham, Edward, Henry Tudor, and countless others spilled just as much (if not more) blood in their pursuit of the crown. Winner's tend to write the history books, and the Tudor's wasted no time in painting Richard as highly flawed individual which strengthened their claim.
For more information, check out Encyclopedia Britannica's many articles on the real historical characters, as well as the Richard III society's various publications. englishmonarchs.uk has great information about Richard and Anne, which I've summarized above.
If possible I highly recommend seeing an unabridged production of Richard III, it's a very long play we're talking 4 hours but the abridged productions miss a lot of fantastic scenes, Buckingham is a key character in the play and his role is often cut down which is sad because he has some of the best lines (many of the chapter titles come from his lines). I was lucky enough to see a staged reading full version by the Dallas Shakespeare Company and it was an absolute blast. We had like three or four breaks it was so long, it was amazing. You really don't get the scope of the play if you don't get the full thing. The Hollow Crown version is great, but so heavily cut. Looking For Richard, is also heavily cut, but it retains many of my favorite speeches and scenes and includes heavy discussion of them which is fun. The White Queen TV series and novels are quite good, The Kingmaker's Daughter follow's Anne's life. It's largely historically accurate and is a fairly sympathetic portrayal of Richard.
The above is just the tip of the iceberg of the real people, places, and motivations, as well as interpretations of Shakespeare's text. Please see the Richard III society for most accurate information on Richard's life.