Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Who thinks the Princes in the Tower were murdered?
There has been speculation for centuries. Most historians believe that Richard the Third had his young nephews murdered. Not long after, a young man claiming to be Richard Plantagenet came on the scene. History says he was actually Perkin Warbeck--an imposter. What do you think?
Speculation, speculation!! If only we had DNA evidence back then!!
3 Answers
- DoethinebLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
I believe that the boys were murdered. Indeed, in 1674 the bodies of two boys of the relevant ages were discovered under the stairs of the White Tower. But why should Richard want to murder them? He was happy enough up in Yorkshire, where he had regional power and was greatly liked. He was a pious man and he and Lady Anne owned their own prayer books, a rare thing in those days and a sign of piety. What's more, Elizabeth Woodville, mother of the young princes, entrusted her daughters to his care. Revisionists point to the fact that Elizabeth Woodville would never have surrendered her daughters to Richard's keeping if he had murdered her sons, the Princes. It should be remembered that prior to this event he had already executed her other son, Sir Richard Grey.
Henry VII, on the other hand, had a great interest in securing the removal of the young princes. He had a very tenuous claim to the throne and here were two young boys standing clearly in his way. While they were still around, his schemes to ascend the throne were impossible to carry out.
Henry IV was a notorious womaniser who had probably begotten children all over the place. Perkin Warbeck, with his strong resemblance to Edward V, was probably his illegitimate son.
So many interests were at play in this whole saga that we shall probably never know the truth. The House of Lancaster was determined to blacken the name of Richard III, while not going to the lengths of carrying out a serious investigation of what had happened to the young princes. Why not? Had they been persuaded of Richard's guilt an investigation might have assisted them!
- aidan402Lv 61 decade ago
I have followed this, on and off, for many years. I honestly believe that Richard III had knowledge of their murders, but did not order them outright. Sort of like all monarchs...once they let their wishes be known, in a speculative sort of way.."please do keep the boys well, for one would not want to be taken to task in the event of their harm"....then they leave it to someone else to carry out...that way, no responsibility clings to them.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The only one who benefited from the death of the two young princes was King Richard III.
There are hundreds of cases in history in which the planned death of someone will benefit some other one.
Inevitably that someone benefited, is the one, who planned the crime.
Richard III WAS the one who ordered the asassination of his two nephews.