In this book, and many more, no one did. The boys were sent somewhere else, or, as in this one, Edward dies a natural death. Which has always made more sense to me, that they were sent away, because why kill someone and then try to pretend nothing happened? The bodies could have easily been shown and it put out that they had sickened and died. Lots of children did. People may not have believed it, but they couldn't prove anything. Wouldn't have been worse than how things ended up.
The Queen won't let them check the bones, so, no, they don't know who they belong to. Considering how long the Tower has been there, they could be anyone. It's not as if those are the only bones that have been found there. And dismantling a staircase, digging a hole ten feet deep, burying the chest, covering up the hole, and then rebuilding the staircase, all over night, in a place that was basically a city, doesn't sound at all plausible.
No, I meant that they could have just said that the boys had died of natural causes, whether they had or not. Once the bodies were shown, who could argue with them? It would have put to rest a lot of the rumors. Just pretending that nothing had happened, that they were still in the Tower, doesn't make any sense.
I agree there are a lot of ways to dispose of bodies, but yeah. The real problem, the mystery, is WHERE did the boys go? As you say, if they died of natural causes, SHOW the bodies. Kids died all the time, as you so rightly say. The fact that they disappeared, to me, says foul play. Whose, I don't know, but ...
One theory is that Richard had the boys removed to an undisclosed location after there had been an attempt to kidnap them from the tower. Since most of the people who might have known where died with him, or had to flee, they could have been anywhere, the prevailing idea being that they were sent to his sister in Burgundy.
But ... they would have grown up, yes? And known who they were. And the sister knew. I mean, there'd be some evidence of them somewhere, some time when they appeared in the historical record in some way, even if only to renounce any claim on the throne.
I am by no means an expert in the story, but it seems they vanished. And with royals back then (well, anyone, really), that tends to mean dead. And I can't see how it can be of natural causes - so, assassination.
I do wonder if, as with Richard himself, technology and time will reveal what actually happened in my lifetime.
There is a school of thought that believes that Perkin Warbeck was actually one of the princes. He was supported by Margaret of Burgundy, Richard's sister and therefore his aunt. Once caught in England, he was imprisoned and then a somewhat suspect "escape plan" was hatched with Edward, the Earl of Warwick, George's son (and so also Richard's nephew.) Both were caught and executed.
Which sort of brings up the issue of Edward. Being the son of Richard's older brother, his claim to the throne was just as solid as the princes'. They had been declared bastards after it came to light that their father was actually married to someone else when he married their mother, while Edward was tainted by his father's treason. Many think that George, his father, knew of the first marriage, thus his own imprisonment and execution. But while Richard sent Edward to live in Richard's wife's household, when he came to the throne, Henry VII thought him enough of a threat to throw him in the tower.
I mean, I realize not every royal back then had people killed at the drop of a helm. But ...
The Perkin Warbeck thing is interesting. Sometimes you'd really love to be somewhere with technology from now so you could learn the truth about things like that. What if he really WAS Richard? I don't know much about him. I should read up, out of curiosity, to learn what he had to say about himself and his "brother."
It is. No one can really know what happened; you sort of have to go with your gut, as far as what you learn about the character of each person. But I really do wish the bones at Westminster could be tested. Not that it would prove anything, one way or the other, but it would be nice to know.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2019-06-20 06:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-20 11:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-20 03:49 pm (UTC)I mean, come on. They were in line for the throne and they disappeared. Yes, royals got diseases then too. But seriously? I'm just sayin'.
Oy fink dey wuz dun in, at's wot oy fink.
no subject
Date: 2019-06-21 11:22 am (UTC)No, I meant that they could have just said that the boys had died of natural causes, whether they had or not. Once the bodies were shown, who could argue with them? It would have put to rest a lot of the rumors. Just pretending that nothing had happened, that they were still in the Tower, doesn't make any sense.
no subject
Date: 2019-06-22 01:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-22 12:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-22 04:58 pm (UTC)I am by no means an expert in the story, but it seems they vanished. And with royals back then (well, anyone, really), that tends to mean dead. And I can't see how it can be of natural causes - so, assassination.
I do wonder if, as with Richard himself, technology and time will reveal what actually happened in my lifetime.
no subject
Date: 2019-06-23 11:53 am (UTC)Which sort of brings up the issue of Edward. Being the son of Richard's older brother, his claim to the throne was just as solid as the princes'. They had been declared bastards after it came to light that their father was actually married to someone else when he married their mother, while Edward was tainted by his father's treason. Many think that George, his father, knew of the first marriage, thus his own imprisonment and execution. But while Richard sent Edward to live in Richard's wife's household, when he came to the throne, Henry VII thought him enough of a threat to throw him in the tower.
no subject
Date: 2019-06-23 11:00 pm (UTC)The Perkin Warbeck thing is interesting. Sometimes you'd really love to be somewhere with technology from now so you could learn the truth about things like that. What if he really WAS Richard? I don't know much about him. I should read up, out of curiosity, to learn what he had to say about himself and his "brother."
It's just one of those tantalizing stories.
no subject
Date: 2019-06-24 11:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-20 10:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-20 11:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-06-21 11:08 am (UTC)