Who do you think did in the princes in the tower?

[Chatterbox]

LH -- I loved that interview....

Let's just say that I'd only put money on any one of these alternatives if someone held a gun to my head. But I tilt toward the Buckingham or Henry VII options, rather than the Richard III option. Because, at the end of the day, Richard's rule was stable. His challenge came from Henry Tudor, not from anyone fighting to restore the boys. Could Richard have done it? Absolutely, if he felt he was threatened. I think it was more likely that he got the boys out of London and the public eye, while he figured out what to do with them when they grew up. (That would be the real challenge...) I do think that getting rid of them was something he had to consider in light of the fact that they wouldn't stay relatively helpless young boys for long, but by the same token, putting aside his lifelong loyalty to his brother to the extent of murdering that brother's two sons???? that's a big leap for me. I could see Buckingham "doing a Becket", as in the case of the 4 knights who responded to Henry II's cry of "will no one rid me of this turbulent priest!" by rushing off to Canterbury and murdering Thomas Becket. Or someone else 'doing a Becket' and Richard having to find a way to live with a result he didn't order and didn't really desire, but that neatly solved what would have become a problem.

Sorry, a rambling answer to a multiple choice answer!

[LoveHistory]

Here's an idea that doesn't come up too often: maybe nobody murdered them...maybe they got sick...and died.

[boswellbaxter]

[quote=""Chatterbox""]LH -- I loved that interview....

Let's just say that I'd only put money on any one of these alternatives if someone held a gun to my head. But I tilt toward the Buckingham or Henry VII options, rather than the Richard III option. Because, at the end of the day, Richard's rule was stable. His challenge came from Henry Tudor, not from anyone fighting to restore the boys. [/quote]

I'd certainly agree it's not an open-or-shut case. But there were people plotting to restore the boys just weeks after Richard was crowned--several people were executed for doing just that. The 1483 rebellion started out as an attempt to restore the boys--only after rumors circulated that they were dead did Henry Tudor become a viable threat. Buckingham himself was appointed to investigate treasonous activity against Richard before he himself joined the rebellion that bears his name.

[robinbird79]

[quote=""LoveHistory""]Here's an idea that doesn't come up too often: maybe nobody murdered them...maybe they got sick...and died.[/quote]

I thought I read somewhere that Edward was sick? I want to say what I read mentioned some sort of absess in a tooth or something like that. I can not remember where I saw this though.

I have also thought that someone might have pulled "a Beckett" as well, thinking they were doing Richard a favor.

[boswellbaxter]

[quote=""robinbird79""]I thought I read somewhere that Edward was sick? I want to say what I read mentioned some sort of absess in a tooth or something like that. I can not remember where I saw this though.

[/quote]


One of the skeletons found in the Tower and said to be those of the princes is said to have showed signs of jaw disease. There's no other evidence for Edward suffering from ill health, though--before they disappeared, he and his brother were reportedly seen outdoors practicing archery.

[robinbird79]

[quote=""boswellbaxter""]One of the skeletons found in the Tower and said to be those of the princes is said to have showed signs of jaw disease. There's no other evidence for Edward suffering from ill health, though--before they disappeared, he and his brother were reportedly seen outdoors practicing archery.[/quote]

That must be what I'm thinking of.

[Chatterbox]

[quote=""boswellbaxter""] But there were people plotting to restore the boys just weeks after Richard was crowned--several people were executed for doing just that. The 1483 rebellion started out as an attempt to restore the boys--only after rumors circulated that they were dead did Henry Tudor become a viable threat. Buckingham himself was appointed to investigate treasonous activity against Richard before he himself joined the rebellion that bears his name.[/quote]

True; I just feel that Richard had a fairly firm grip on the crown. Even Bosworth was only tilted in Henry's favor thanks to the Stanleys & others swayed by Margaret Beaufort. Hmm, in some ways, maybe Richard should have locked her up instead, and thrown away the key?