He was under a parking lot. For centuries, people just drove over him, parked their sedans, and went about their day in Leicester without realizing the last English king to die in battle was right there. It’s wild. When we talk about a king like Richard III, we aren't just talking about history books or Shakespearean villains with hunched backs and sinister monologues. We’re talking about a massive cultural obsession that refuses to die.
Honestly, the discovery in 2012 changed everything. It wasn't just a skeleton; it was a physical rebuttal to centuries of Tudor propaganda. You’ve probably heard the stories—the "Usurper," the "Crookback," the guy who allegedly smothered his nephews in the Tower of London. But history is rarely that clean. It's messy.
👉 See also: Why a Short Haircut for Women Over 40 Is Actually a Power Move
The Reality of Richard III vs. The Legend
Most people know the Shakespeare version. You know the one—the guy who offers his kingdom for a horse. But Shakespeare was writing for a Tudor audience. If you wanted to keep your head in the 1590s, you didn't write nice things about the guy the current Queen’s grandfather defeated at Bosworth Field. You just didn't.
So, what do we actually know? Richard was the last of the Plantagenet dynasty. He reigned for only two years, from 1483 to 1485. He wasn't born to be king. He was the younger brother of Edward IV, a loyal soldier who spent most of his life holding the north of England together. Then, Edward died. The transition was a disaster. Richard claimed his brother’s marriage was invalid, making the heirs illegitimate, and took the throne himself.
It was a bold, some say desperate, move.
The "Princes in the Tower" remains the biggest cold case in British history. Did he kill them? Many historians, including the likes of Dan Jones, point to the fact that they simply vanished from public view once Richard took power. It’s a bad look. However, there’s no smoking gun. No records. No receipts. Just a silence that has lasted 500 years.
What the Bones Actually Told Us
When University of Leicester archaeologists, led by Richard Buckley, unearthed the remains in that Social Services car park, the world stopped. The science was fascinating.
First, the scoliosis. Richard did have a curved spine. It wasn't the "hunchback" of legend, but a significant lateral curvature. His right shoulder would have been higher than his left. Yet, his arms weren't withered. He was a warrior. The skeleton showed "hummingbird" grace in life but brutal violence in death. He had 11 wounds, many to the skull, suggesting his helmet was lost or removed during the final moments at Bosworth.
His diet was also crazy. Isotope analysis showed that once he became king, his diet shifted dramatically to include expensive game birds and freshwater fish, washed down with significant amounts of wine. He lived the life. Even for a short time.
Why a King Like Richard III Still Matters Today
It's about the underdog story, or maybe the "misunderstood villain" trope that we all seem to love. The Richard III Society has been fighting to clear his name since 1924. They argue he was a reformer. And they have a point.
During his brief reign, Richard introduced the concept of "Bail," meaning people wouldn't be stuck in jail waiting for trial. He also pushed for laws to be written in English rather than French or Latin so the average person could actually understand them. He was, in some ways, a king for the people. Or at least, he tried to be.
But the controversy persists. You can't just ignore the "usurpation."
- Legal Reforms: He basically pioneered the idea of a fairer justice system.
- The Northern Powerhouse: He was genuinely loved in York and the North, a regional loyalty that lasted long after he died.
- The Military End: He died fighting. He didn't flee. He charged Henry Tudor’s lines directly. That takes a certain kind of grit.
The Discoverability of Modern History
The 2012 find wasn't just a win for history; it was a win for DNA science. Dr. Turi King and her team tracked down living descendants through the maternal line—Michael Ibsen and Wendy Duldig. The DNA matched. It was a 99.999% certainty.
This is why people are still Googling him. We live in an era where we can fact-check the past with a swab of saliva. It’s basically CSI: Middle Ages.
But there’s a limit to what science can do. It can tell us how he died, what he ate, and how his back felt on a cold morning. It can't tell us what was in his head. It can't tell us if he felt guilty about his nephews or if he truly believed he was the only one who could save England from another civil war.
Moving Past the Myth
If you want to understand the real man, you have to look past the velvet robes and the Shakespearean drama. You have to look at the administrative records.
📖 Related: Jordan 12 White and Game Royal: Why the Blueberry Colorway Is a Certified Sleeper
Richard was a micromanager. He was obsessed with the efficiency of his council. He spent a lot of time on the road, trying to be visible to his subjects. He wasn't a shadowy figure hiding in a castle; he was an active, albeit controversial, ruler trying to stabilize a country that had been torn apart by the Wars of the Roses for decades.
The tragedy of Richard is that he died before he could prove what kind of king he would be. Two years isn't enough time to build a legacy, but it's plenty of time to get framed by your successors.
Actionable Insights for History Buffs
If you’re looking to dive deeper into this period, don't just stick to the standard biographies. Here is how to actually get a grip on the era:
1. Visit the Sites (Virtually or In-Person)
Go to the Richard III Visitor Centre in Leicester. It’s built right over the grave site. If you can’t travel, use the University of Leicester’s 3D bone scans online. Seeing the curvature of the spine in 3D changes your perspective on his physical struggles.
2. Read the Primary Sources
Look up the "Titulus Regius." This is the document where Richard’s claim to the throne was laid out. It’s dry, legalistic, and reveals the political gymnastics used to justify his kingship. It’s much more interesting than a play.
3. Check the Archaeology
Follow the "Looking for Richard" project updates. The work didn't stop in 2012. There is ongoing research into the battlefields of Bosworth to pinpoint exactly where the lines were drawn.
4. Compare the Accounts
Read Polydore Vergil (who wrote for the Tudors) and compare him to Dominic Mancini (an Italian who was in London at the time). The differences in their "vibe" regarding Richard will show you exactly how historical "spin" works.
The story of a king like Richard III is a reminder that the past isn't fixed. It’s a conversation. We find new evidence, we re-examine the DNA, and we realize that the people we thought were monsters were just people—flawed, ambitious, and sometimes, buried under a parking lot.
To truly understand him, you have to look at the laws he passed, the battles he fought, and the silence he left behind. The truth is usually found somewhere between the Tudor propaganda and the modern fan clubs. It’s not about finding a hero or a villain; it’s about finding the man.