Do you think Richard III really killed the Princes in the Tower?

Question

he wasn't there at the time, they posed a greater threat to his opposition and The duke of Buckingham, who was Constable of the tower of london was there and had the keys! within weeks of the boys disapearance he revolted against Richard and made his own bid for the throne which he wouldn't have been in a position to do if te boys were still alive. Henry VII's claim would have also been much much weaker. So what do you think?

Answer 1

The Tudors had a very shaky claim to the English throne (it was through Henry VII's matrilineal side of the family. The social structure of England at that time meant that there were many powerful barons and potential claimants to the throne either through bloodline or violence. Therefore propaganda, such as Shakespeare's story, was rife to build up the Tudor claim against the House of York throughout the Tudor dynasty. So Richard III's reputation and character were presented as villainous. Books that I have read on him suggest that he was a very popular leader in York during his brother's reign, and that he loved his wife and child who pre-deceased him. A note of interest is that it might have been that the two princes' father, Edward IV, was himself illegitimate and not a legal claimant to the throne.

As to who did murder them - I think that there are many contenders for the reasons above.

Answer 2

In Shakespeare's "Richard III", Richard does order someone by the name of Tyrell ,I think, to go to the towers and murder the 2 princes. Tyrell hires 2 of the most heartless savages in England to do it and even they almost don't do it because it was a bad sight. they had to hush up the princes with pillows so they wouldn't have to look at their faces. Buckingham didn't want to do this so he fled and Richard hired the others.
real life-I dono.

Answer 3

I'm not up on this. But I have heard of it. I suppose the answer can be deduced by just remembering human behavior. The one that stood to gain the most by the 2 Prince's deaths is the one that did it. The Duke of Buckingham seems likely as you suggest. Unless it was The Duke of Earl, that dirty rat. Then again who put them in the Tower? Richard the 3rd right? They must have been a threat to him or he would have had no reason to jail them? The fact that he wasn't around when the dirty deed was done was to his advantage too. He told the Duke of Buckingham to do it. Then he left London so suspicion wouldn't be on him. The Duke had no objections because as you said they would threaten him if he was successful in his revolt. Was the jail door in the tower broken into or was it unlocked. If it was unlocked then it had to be the Bucking Duke because he had the keys. Its seems these 2 poor kids didn't benefit anyone by being alive. They were as Al Gore would say an "Inconvenient Truth." Hey! that's pretty good. You can use that if you like. Well see ya. There are still tons of History questions I know nothing about that must be answered.

Answer 4

First of all, I would like to say that most of what we think about Richard III comes from Shakespeare's history, which cannot be counted on to be accurate. Afterall, he wrote it in a time when the Tudors held the throne, so obviously, he had to make the Plantaganets look bad.

Though Richard probably was not as villainous as Shakespeare described him, I think we can say with confidence that he wanted the throne of England. However, other sources say that Richard sent the two princes to the countryside at the time that the Lancasters were rallying for another attack, and he himself went to battle.

He could have arranged it, making him the only heir to the throne, but it seems unlikely.

Answer 5

No, without evidence there is no proof to establish who or if the boys
were killed at all.
The bones of two children are on display in an Urn at Westminster
Abbey, it is thought that they are the bodies of the Princes, but
tests on these bones in 1933 were unable to determine their gender.
Unless things have advanced, it is still impossible to determine the
gender of prepubertal skeletons as far as I am aware.

All that we know for sure is that there are no records of the Princes
being seen after early 1485. No one ever came forward during King
Richard's monarchy and raised the story of the Princes murder.
This purely came about after Henry VII took the throne.
Personally I believe the boys were taken to live in Sandal castle
and they may have escaped the Tudor menace by being sent abroad.

Answer 6

There seems to be some mis-apprehensions here. The Tower was a royal palace at the time so the boys were not in prison but living in the palace. I don't think there is any doubt the their father was illegitimate as recently discovered documents have shown Therefore Edward had no claim to the throne but both boys still represented a dangerous rallying point to anyone challenging Richard's rein or Henry's so I think it was inevitable that they had to die. That was the way polotics was conducted in those days

Answer 7

A document found from the period reports that the older of the two princes was suffering from a cough...in the damp atmosphere of the Tower, it is very likely that both of them died of a respiratory ailment. Richard would have had very little control over their fate in this case, because even the best treatment of the time was pretty useless.
If this was the case, Richard most likely would have concealed the fact, because if he publicized their deaths, everyone would assume he had a hand in it, whether he did or not.
Shakespeare paints Richard as a murdering monster, but we must realize that Shakespeare was writing for the grand-daughter of the man who deposed Richard. One slants things to please the people who could have one beheaded if they chose.

Answer 8

i imagine Richard III grow to be behind it, no matter if by technique of foreknowledge or no longer. His supporters might want to have executed it without his expertise. The barons of england were divided over help for Richard III and the more youthful princes and eliminating the princes eradicated the different claimants to the throne, leaving the barons who adversarial Richard no one to help and minimized the threat of a revolt.

Answer 9

Personally and judging by the available evidence its a fair conclusion that he had something to do with it. Did he do it himself? NO. There are several theories both pro and con. Like many events of so long ago the real absolute truth will never be know. Try this Book

Princes in the Tower by Allison Weir

Answer 10

You've got to remember that the victors write the history books and the stories of the princes in the tower appeared in history books after Richard's death and during the reign of the Tudors. It could have happened and yes, the contemporary evidence says it did, but once you weigh up the two sides, it could have gone either way! If 'he' did kill them, it was more likely to have been on his command rather that done personally by him.