The Exaggerated Dark History of Richard III and it’s Damaging Relations to the Princes in the Tower

     Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More were not omniscient beings. Shakespeare was born close to one hundred years after the death of Richard III, and Sir Thomas More was a boy of only seven years upon the death of Richard III. With that being said, why would any scholar not question the legitimacy of the content of their writings and accounts of Richard III? Many historians have this picture of Richard III in their minds as a cruel, calloused, power hungry usurper who ordered the murder of his own nephews, the princes in the tower. However, there is simply no way of proving this, unless any devout readers hold truths to the works I’ve previously mentioned written by men ruled under monarchs who bear the name Tudor. The Tudors destroyed Richard in the battle at Bosworth Field and put an end to the York reign. This alone is enough to claim that they would not want any recorded history of Richard being a good and just ruler. 

     Let’s agree for a short while that the princes were in fact murdered. Why would Richard III order their deaths when the majority of England were in favor of his brother Edward IV and his sons, the princes in the tower. If there was anyone who had more of a motive to murder these two boys, it would be Margaret Beaufort. The biggest motive for this would be for her to have men she is in alliance with murder the boys and put the blame on Richard, casting him out of the favor of England. For context, Margaret Beaufort was the mother of Henry VII, King of England who defeated Richard III in battle and ascended the throne. Margaret lived at court while Richard III was king. This meant she had a closer than most access to the tower of London, where the princes were being held. During this time, her son Henry VII is plotting an attack against Richard. So Margaret, being the pious woman and devout mother that she was, would of course want to clear the path even further than just Richard for her son Henry to win the throne. If Henry defeated Richard in battle, and the princes were left alive, he would still have the princes and their supporters to deal with. Margaret was known for her schemes and political skills so if the princes were murdered it was not at the hands of Richard III, but the Tudor matriarch who betrayed the house of York to place her son on the throne.

     An argument I have previously touched on that could be the most compelling piece of evidence is the fact that to this day the truth about the princes has not come out to the public. The late Queen Elizabeth II’s refusal to allow further investigation into this case should make people wonder why. Why are two medieval princes still relevant to the crown today? They would hold no relevance if they were murdered. However, if they were allowed to live, and went on to marry, and produced their own heirs, they would have created a lineage that could still be alive today. And if that is the case, which I wholeheartedly believe it is, the entire line of succession in the English Monarchy today would be thrown out of order. Living heirs of the princes would mean total and utter chaos for the English Crown today. According to The Telegraph “Previous correspondence suggests that the Church of England, backed by the Queen, refused DNA testing on the grounds that it could set a precedent for testing historical theories that would lead to multiple royal disinterments.”

     Along with the fact that the monarchy is clearly hiding something from desirous historians and academics alike, there is the argument of the “princes” bones. If scientists were allowed to do further research, carbon dating analyses, and also extensive DNA testing on these bones, we would have a simple and true answer to if these bones belonged to the princes, and if so, what the most likely cause of death was. As of right now, scientists do not have access to do this, so the minimal evidence that is given must be used to ascertain the most logical fate of the princes, which is that Richard declared the princes illegitimate and spared their lives. The bones that were discovered near a staircase in the Tower of London were not even concluded to be those of two young boys. They could have very well been two female child skeletons for all that we know, or two commoner male child skeletons. Another interesting point in the favor of my thesis is that if Richard did want all the power for himself and he was callous and cruel, wouldn’t he present the bodies of the princes to the people if he did murder them? To snuff his brother’s entire line of succession and those who support it? It was a common thing in medieval times for the bodies of dead traitors or enemies to be put on display or placing traitors heads on spikes by the tower gates as well. Why would Richard as he is portrayed by More and Shakespeare leave anything up to the imagination when it came to his enemies? Why would he give the princes’ supporters that glimmer of hope that they are still alive? The Richard so cruelly and unfairly portrayed in history would not have done those things.

     There really are no solid facts that would uphold the claim that Richard murdered his nephews, the princes in the tower. This theory in itself also is one that provides no intrigue. Sure, claiming that “treacherous” Richard III ordered the deaths of his brother’s beloved little boys would emit scandal and shock, but the theory that he allowed them to live, provides a different insight into the character of Richard III. Queen Elizabeth II’s refusal for further investigation, the degenerative bone disease found on the eldest skeleton that did not match any health or physical attributes of the princes, their mother Elizabeth of Woodville’s return to court after their disappearance, and Margaret Beauforts ambitions, all hold enough power to disprove More and Shakespeare’s accounts of Richard and any other vicious account of him thereof, that he murdered the princes in the tower.

References

More, T. (n.d.). The history of king king richard the third – thomas more studies. https://thomasmorestudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Richard_III_English_glossed.pdf

Shakespeare, W. (1593). Richard III: Entire play. http://shakespeare.mit.edu/richardiii/full.html

Brain, J. (2023, November 21). Lady Margaret Beaufort. Historic UK. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Lady-Margaret-Beaufort/

Ward, V. (14 Oct. 2022) Mystery of Princes in the Tower Could Finally Be Solved – with Help from King Charles. The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/10/14/king-charles-rumoured-want-mystery-princes-tower-solved/