The latest on the Princes in the Tower

The adage about some stories simply running and running is undoubtedly true about the fate of the Princes in theTower.  For more than five centuries, with varying degrees of intensity, it has been a part of the consciousness of the English speaking world. Over the past century that interest has multiplied resulting in new research and insights, and also in an often heated and passionate debate between the various factions about who was to blame for whatever happened. That debate has become at times in recent years acrimonious and fraught in ways the generate heat but but a little light.

The latest development from the academic side is reported upon in today’s edition of the Daily Telegraph. This apparently shows a link in the form of a gold chain between King Edward V and Sir James Tyrell, the man often claimed to have murdered him and his brother. The research is being published and tomorrow night, Tuesday December 3rd, on Channel 5 at 9pm there is a documentary about the research. This does appear to be another instance of evidence hiding in plain sight amongst the documentary evidence. It may help to convince or reinforce the views of those who think that Tyrrell did indeed murder the two boys. It will also no doubt be explain very differently by those who are determined at every point to acquit King Richard III of any part in the death of his nephews. We should perhaps be prepared for some lively exchanges.

The Daily Telegraph article can be seen at The ‘smoking gun’ evidence that could finally prove Princes in the Tower were murdered

The Princes in the Tower - a series of academic videos

The continuing fascination with the fate of the Princes in the Tower generates ever more commentary and theories. 

King Edward V and his brother Richard Duke of York and Norfolk, or, if you look at their legal status after late June 1483, the bastardised children of the adulterous, invalid, marriage of the late King Edward IV, and thus no longer Princes, disappeared that summer. No one has proof of whatever happened to them subsequently. In the absence of clear proof speculation has grown, and continued to grow. Today, for many, it boils down, with various caveats, to whether you think King Richard III was responsible directly or indirectly for their deaths, or whether you think he acted honourably as Lord Protector in removing two illegitimate interlopers, and that their fate was not his responsibility, or indeed that he quietly removed them to live out their lives elsewhere. Barring natural death or genuine accident it depends on whether you are a Ricardian or not.

I came upon another video on YouTube about an aspect of the case which led me to find it is part of an ongoing series of related videos made over the past year by a German historian. There are at present twenty of these videos, which vary in length but explore the minutiae of the disappearance, and focus in particular on the physical layout of the Tower of London. They are well researched and informative, raising points and questions I have not seen made elsewhere. The underlying argument is that King Richard III was indeed responsible for the deaths of his two nephews, and is hostile to the idea that they escaped and reappeared as Lambert Simnel or Perkin Warbeck - so you have been warned if you are a committed Ricardian. If not, or have an open mind on this not much cold case as one permanently on the back burner, simmering away for five and a half centuries, they are worth watching or certainly dipping into. Some are upwards of an hour long, others much shorter, but taken together form a very interesting resource. One even undertakes the risky business of enquiring as to what drives so many Ricardians and their dedication to exculpating the King. 

They can be found from the first in the series, by clicking on the information link, at The Princes In The Tower Without DNA: A Historian's Project Idea To Find New Evidence - And A Theory