Body of Richard III identified

[Alexander's Horse]

a lot of people simply vanished in the Tower of London over the centuries - I wonder if a serious archeological dig has ever been done - probably not - literally too many skeletons in the closet

[Dr Strangelove]

You see? I told you so. The royals are hiding something. The last thing they want is for someone to discover Jimmy Hoffa and Amelia Earhart buried under their tower.

[Alexander's Horse]

lol they don't need those - the Tudors alone despatched hundreds there

[Ben Kenobi]

It's fairly well established that the princes made it to London and were placed in the tower. Was Buckingham in a position to have the deed done under his own power?

Yes, he was Constable of the Tower of London.

If someone other than himself had the boys snuffed then why did Richard keep the dirty deed a secret?

Doesn't appear to be the case. Richard executed Buckingham that October.

Was Buckingham in a position to place his own men in charge of the tower?

Better. He was in charge of the Tower.

I don't really see how the Tudor history holds up blaming Richard III. Buckingham has the motive and the opportunity.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I don't really see how the Tudor history holds up blaming Richard III. Buckingham has the motive and the opportunity.

The Tudors had to blame Richard III, to give the appearance that Henry Tudor wasn't just an opportunistic traitor.

[Dr Strangelove]

Yes, he was Constable of the Tower of London.



Doesn't appear to be the case. Richard executed Buckingham that October.



Better. He was in charge of the Tower.

I don't really see how the Tudor history holds up blaming Richard III. Buckingham has the motive and the opportunity.

Buckingham was indeed one of the major players in the first rebellion against Richard III, switching sides and supporting Henry Tudor for the throne. Tragically for him the first rebellion was a dud and Buckingham was caught and executed. Could Buckingham have schemed to put himself on the throne by removing the princes, then removing Richard III by pinning the crime on Richard and using the crime as a cause celebre to rally a rebellion? The problem with that idea is that Buckingham supported Henry, not himself for the throne. Had the rebellion succeeded how would he have removed Henry Tudor? OTOH if Buckingham had eliminated the princes, why didn't Richard pin the crime on him after the first rebellion failed?

[Ben Kenobi]

Richard pin the crime on him after the first rebellion failed?

That's exactly what Richard did say. Richard himself argued that Buckingham starved the Princes in the Tower, and then executed Buckingham that October.

[Dr Strangelove]

Buckingham was executed as a traitor because he led a force opposed to Richard.
Maybe this is why the children's bones found under the stairs should be DNA tested. If they match as Yorkies then Richard's claim that they were starved can't be true, because there are signs of a violent demise ( blood staining of the nasal bones of one skull ).

[MichaeltheGreat]

Most likely they have the same DNA issues as Richard's bones - only mDNA was recoverable in sufficient quantity for a match, so you'd need to find a lineal descendant through the female line of the presumed mother of the skeletons.

[Alexander's Horse]

which might be difficult since the current monarchy is rather embarrassingly unrelated, this came out during the Dianna controversy, as a Stuart she had better English bloodlines than the Windsors (or Battenbergs, changed WWI), a point made cuttingly by her brother at her funeral.

With some of these bods, you might to search amongst dis-inherited relations in Australia or the US, lol.

[molly bloom]

The last report that they were alive was in 1483.

Unfortunately an awful lot of manuscripts have been lost since then- and an awful lot of people didn't write.

There was a set of remains discovered beneath some stairs at the tower, descriptions stated that they were clad in velvet.

The Tower Of London is a Royal Palace- as well as a prison. Royals and aristocrats have stayed there, as lodgers and unwilling 'guests' of the reigning monarch. Epidemics of one sort or another were always carrying off commoners and nobles- England famously had a 'sweating sickness', at least until Elizabeth I's time.

The bones were interred, then dis-interred for study in the 1930's.

The bones were found to include some animal bones, indicating the rather casual treatment they first received on being discovered. The question which nobody has asked so far, is why would Richard III, if he was such a monster, allow the bodies to be hurriedly buried in the Tower, rather than taken out at night to the river and thrown in ?

One skull showed blood stains and fractures thought to be consistant with smothering.

The pathologist's assertion about the red staining on the facial bones is actually inaccurate (according to a forensic archaeologist I knew at university). The staining could have been from dye in material or metal salts or....

After Henry VII had Perkin Warbeck captured he used the excuse of having him on his hands to rid himself of the Earl of Warwick too- and so went the last major Plantagenet player in Tudor custody.

The Tudors could be quite ruthless when it came to money and defending their throne.