The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 06-21-2015, 12:55 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,889
Henry Tudor wasn't in England at the time that the two young princes were last seen. Elizabeth Woodville didn't have any live sons left to be a trouble and a nuisance to Henry when he became king. Her daughter had a better claim to the throne but nobody in medieval times would have replaced a king who won the throne by conquest with a female.

However those two boys were certainly obstacles to the throne for Richard. Being Lord Protector wasn't good enough. Take a close look at Richard's actions between the summary execution of Lord Rivers and Richard's coronation and see whether these correlate with being a loving uncle. He did actually deprive his nephew king Edward V of the throne, you know, and placed himself there instead!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-21-2015, 07:18 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,919
Well Henry Tudor didn't have to be in England to have them killed. His mother was there...easily enough to have it ordered to be done.

Henry Tudor didn't want to have to deal with any York heirs either that people might want to replace him with at some point. Or that might want to just kill him and replace him as they got older.

Tudor executed Edward Plantagenet along with Warbeck...Edward had been held in the tower for years. Henry killed a York heir and a possible heir. He could of easily ordered the death of the first two heirs (or rather heir and fake heir ..not that he would of known that one was a substitute).

He deprived a York heir from the throne as well.


LaRae
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-21-2015, 12:51 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,226
Executing Warbeck was justified - he had been trying to overthrow the king. Executing Edward was less so, as he hadn't done anything to justify execution, but you can kind of understand why Henry did it - Edward posed a threat.

Henry wasn't fighting for the Yorks, so saying that he was depriving York heirs of the right to rule is misleading. Henry was the Lancastrian heir and believed that he and his line had the right to rule, not the Yorks. The Yorks may have believed otherwise, but we don't say that Edward IV was depriving the Lancaster heirs of their right to rule, do we?

Richard III did deprive a York heir the right to rule - he was for the Yorks, but when it worked for him he locked up his nephews from both brothers in order to put himself on the throne.

It's logical to assume that Edward V and his brother died during the reign of Richard III, as that's when they disappeared. It would have been in Henry's favour to kill the boys too, but he's not the one seen holding them last - Richard is.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-21-2015, 12:54 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Yep I lean to the Tudor's as the prime suspects.



I also think it's quite possible that Perkin Warbeck was Richard Duke of York.





LaRae

The problem with the Warbeck claim is that he said he was spared by his brother's murderers because of his age and "innocence". While he was the younger brother, Edward V was only 13 when he disappeared. What murderers are able to justify killing a 13 year old because he's a threat to them, but not the 10 year old who is as much a threat to them the moment that the 13 year old is dead?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-21-2015, 02:23 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 67
I still think Richard III had them killed, probably by Tyrell. The boys weren't seen after mid-1483, and rumours were circulating - had they still been alive, surely he'd have let people see them to prove that they were alive. I know that some people, mostly novelists more than historians, have suggested that someone else got into the Tower during 1483 and had them killed without Richard knowing about it, and that Richard then did nothing about it afterwards, but that idea seems way too far-fetched.

I can't see that we'll ever know for certain, though, which is incredibly frustrating.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-21-2015, 04:36 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,889
Yes, I agree, on all points. The Constable of the Tower was a Duke of Gloucester man through and through. If Richard was keeping the brothers safe it would have meant Constable Brackenbury's head if anyone unauthorised had got into the Tower and harmed them. Plus, Richard would have started a hue and cry, hunting down those responsible. Instead we get nothing from Richard regarding his young nephews but deafening silence.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-20-2015, 05:58 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 16,991
The Princes in the Tower

Britain Magazine | The official magazine of Visit Britain | Best of British History, Royal Family,Travel and Culture - The Princes in the Tower
__________________
May 2nd,1302-Death of Blanche d'Artois, Queen & Regent of Navarre
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-22-2015, 06:51 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 16,991
The Princes in the Tower: Will the ultimate cold case finally be solved after more than 500 years?

The Princes in the Tower: Will the ultimate cold case finally be solved after more than 500 years? - Home News - UK - The Independent
__________________
May 2nd,1302-Death of Blanche d'Artois, Queen & Regent of Navarre
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-11-2015, 02:34 PM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 16,991
King Richard III – Who Said He Killed The Princes In The Tower?

https://mattlewisauthor.wordpress.co...-in-the-tower/
__________________
May 2nd,1302-Death of Blanche d'Artois, Queen & Regent of Navarre
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-28-2016, 05:58 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 16,991
New evidence: The bones of the ‘Princes in the Tower’ show no relationship to Richard III.

New evidence: The bones of the ‘Princes in the Tower’ show no relationship to Richard III — John Ashdown-Hill
__________________
May 2nd,1302-Death of Blanche d'Artois, Queen & Regent of Navarre
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 07-28-2016, 03:09 PM
lady of hay's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: around the uk, United Kingdom
Posts: 268
Thank you for this. I think I would have to read the whole book to be quite sure of where JA-H got the "bones " from which he made the comparison. I had always been led to believe that access to the nur in Westminster Abbey has been denied. Perhaps an exception has been made in the light of J A-H's research into Richard 111.
__________________
Truth is the daughter of time.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-28-2016, 03:57 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 67
I'm not really getting this argument. From how it reads to me, all he's saying is that pictures of the skulls thought to be those of the princes show that they both had teeth missing, but that Richard III had all his teeth. I don't see that that proves anything. The boys could have inherited the missing teeth gene from the Woodvilles, or maybe Edward IV inherited the gene from either Cecily Neville or Richard of York but Richard III didn't - a gene from one parent isn't necessarily passed on to every one of their children. I've actually got a tooth missing and so has my sister, and we inherited this from our maternal grandma, but it seems to have bypassed our mum, so it's something that can even skip a generation.

Sorry, Mr Ashdown-Hill, but I don't see that this proves anything!
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-28-2016, 04:18 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,919
They'll have to do DNA to really know.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-21-2016, 04:48 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Henr
However those two boys were certainly obstacles to the throne for Richard. Being Lord Protector wasn't good enough. Take a close look at Richard's actions between the summary execution of Lord Rivers and Richard's coronation and see whether these correlate with being a loving uncle. He did actually deprive his nephew king Edward V of the throne, you know, and placed himself there instead!
It was Richard III almost beyond a doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-21-2016, 04:50 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,663
There are hugh doubts about Richard's involvement.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-21-2016, 04:57 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,889
Not by many modern historians, there aren't.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 09-22-2016, 03:22 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Not by many modern historians, there aren't.
Im not an expert on medieval but it seems to me mcuh more likely that it was Richard. If he did not balk at having his 2 nephews illegitimised, to get power, i odnt think that he'd balk at killing them if he felt that power was being threatened. Henry Tudor might have done so, but I feel that he didn't have to, since Richard had done it for him.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-07-2016, 09:17 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 2,807
Was there anything suspicious that Edward V stayed in the Tower of London? In the 15th century, the Tower was a palace as well as a prison. English kings sometimes stayed there before their coronations.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-07-2016, 09:41 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,889
I believe most medieval and Tudor monarchs had sumptuously decorated and comfortable apartments at the Tower, with banquets and other celebratory events held there. This continued intermittently right up to the 17th century when these apartments, (many of them in wooden structures) fell into complete disrepair, and yes, most English Kings and Queens prior to King Charles II stayed at the Tower for a short time prior to their Coronations.

However, most, even very young Kings like Richard II, didn't stay in the Tower for a prolonged period, being observed playing out of doors with their brother, and then being withdrawn indoors to an inner part of the Tower, having servants and personal attendants withdrawn and finally being seen no more on this earth! I'd say that was very unusual!
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-07-2016, 11:09 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,190
Was used to varying levels. Henry III invested a lot to make it as comfortable as possible as a royal residence a well as Fort. He held court there and parliament at times. It fell out of royal housing by Tudor times, for the most part, more a prison and storage, Charles II was the last king to leave it for coronation.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 6 (2 members and 4 guests)
AristoCat, bekalc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence, eldest son of Edward VII (1864-1892) tiaraprin British Royal History 190 09-24-2016 07:28 AM
Prince Edward and Sophie Rhys-Jones: 19 June 1999 Solange Royal Weddings 132 07-16-2016 04:16 AM
Princess Benedikte & Prince Richard zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg: 1968 SpiffyBallerina Royal Weddings 19 10-01-2015 02:10 PM
Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester and Miss Birgitte van Deurs: 8 July 1972 Scott Royal Weddings 15 11-20-2014 10:41 AM
Edward, Prince of Wales and Princess Alexandra of Denmark - 1863 windsorbrides1 Historical Royal Weddings 20 01-19-2014 06:51 PM




Popular Tags
affair albania ari behn ascot 2016 best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit june birthday brunei royal family coup d'etat crown princess mary crown princess mary evening dresses crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit eveningwear denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of cornwall's fashion and style duke of cambridge earthquakes fashion poll feminism game jewels king abdullah ii king carl gustaf king carl gustaf and queen silvia king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand noice norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince charles princess marie princess mary princess mary casual style princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats princess sofia princess victoria celebrates birthday queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen margrethe queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion queen silvia september 2016 state visit succession sweden the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats tiara


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:37 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises