Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Richard lll : The King in the Carpark C4 Monday


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16-02-2013, 21:11
budgiemum23
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 118
The princes were declared illegitimate because Edward IV had, prior to his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, entered into a betrothal with Lady Eleanor Butler which was as sacrosanct as marriage. Richard knew nothing of this until Bishop Stillington confessed to knowledge of the relationship. Until this point Richard had been preparing for the young Edward's coronation.

Henry Tudor is the prime suspect for killing the princes but the Duke of Buckingham is also a strong candidate through his descent from Thomas of Woodstock.
budgiemum23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 16-02-2013, 21:12
allie4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 8,060
Thanks, vindicated. That's surprisingly shallow and would have risked flies, maggots and other infestations as well as the smell.



Henry VII was a canny ruler who did his best to mend a fractured society, even going so far as to marrying someone from the House of York. Whatever his real feeings, erecting a monument would have been an easy conciliatory act.
What about the Star Chamber??? he was a bit of a sh*t iirc!!
allie4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2013, 21:15
allafix
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 16,586
Any theories,then, about why he didn't display their bodies to publicly discourage any would-be followers ? Wouldn't be much point in bumping them off to stop opponents if their deaths were never confirmed. He could have said they died of some pox or other.

I actually think he had them stowed away out of sight until he could think of what to do with them. The first minor rebellion against him probably decided it for him - they had to go.
More interesting than that is that he wasn't able to show them alive to prove he hadn't killed them. So they were almost certainly already dead. I think killing them as soon as he could after becoming king was probably the easiest and best solution for him. No risk of them escaping and trying to re-establish their claim.
allafix is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2013, 23:01
Dai Clust
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 347

If you look at pictures of the car park before the dig, the R was only roughly painted, certainly not in the professional way you'd expect in a Council car park. Anyway most car parks with reserved spaces have "RESERVED" painted there, not "R". The parking space wasn't even a full car length long either, so not much of a space to reserve for management. There is what looks like graffiti painted on the tarmac nearby, so I expect it was related to that.

It must have set poor Philippa's heart racing to find an R in the car park she thought he was buried in and that must have contributed to the feelings about the place she said she had felt.


.
Perhaps they should go back and dig up under the S and they might find Shergar
Dai Clust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-02-2013, 23:08
Cadence
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,375
More interesting than that is that he wasn't able to show them alive to prove he hadn't killed them. So they were almost certainly already dead. I think killing them as soon as he could after becoming king was probably the easiest and best solution for him. No risk of them escaping and trying to re-establish their claim.
As the history of Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots shows, wherever there's someone else with a possible claim to the throne, those opposing the monarch tend to gather behind the other claimant. Mary Queen of Scots was always a threat to Eliazabeth I and whilst Elizabeth delayed her execution for a long time, eventually she did it.
Cadence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2013, 00:00
Talma
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,267
Henry VII was a canny ruler who did his best to mend a fractured society, even going so far as to marrying someone from the House of York. Whatever his real feeings, erecting a monument would have been an easy conciliatory act.
He had to marry Elizabeth of York as he'd made a dramatic declaration that he would if he won, even if he did tone it down by not letting her be crowned for over a year, as if her brothers were dead she was the rightful heir and a much better right to it than him. That meant he had to legitimise her - which meant that the same Act legtimised her brothers, who, if alive, would immediately come between him and the throne. One of the first things he did on reaching London after Bosworth was have the Tower searched. He clearly didn't know for sure what had happened to the Princes, (or if he did he never said anything) as he never directly accused Richard of their murder, the obvious thing to do to turn the people against him, and was so terrified years later by Perkin Warbeck that he used him as an excuse to wipe out the remaining male claimants to the throne and had James Tyrrell taken under safe conduct and forced to 'confess' to murdering the boys,

Any theories,then, about why he didn't display their bodies to publicly discourage any would-be followers ? Wouldn't be much point in bumping them off to stop opponents if their deaths were never confirmed. He could have said they died of some pox or other.

I actually think he had them stowed away out of sight until he could think of what to do with them. The first minor rebellion against him probably decided it for him - they had to go.
Except that after the Princes are supposed to have disappeared, their mother let her daughters out of Sanctuary, where they'd holed up after her bid to keep power for her own family had failed, and where they could have stayed indefinitely, into Richard's custody with his promise to treat them as his close family and find them husbands according to their rank. Is it likely a mother would do that if she thought he'd killed her sons? Also she was allegedly involved in the Lambert Simnel uprising, which, if successful, would have removed her daughter from the throne. Not long after that Henry Tudor had her removed to a convent where she died 5 years later.
For a woman well known for acting in her own and her family's interest she did some odd things about that time.
Talma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2013, 03:35
allafix
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 16,586
The princes were declared illegitimate because Edward IV had, prior to his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville, entered into a betrothal with Lady Eleanor Butler which was as sacrosanct as marriage. Richard knew nothing of this until Bishop Stillington confessed to knowledge of the relationship. Until this point Richard had been preparing for the young Edward's coronation.

Henry Tudor is the prime suspect for killing the princes but the Duke of Buckingham is also a strong candidate through his descent from Thomas of Woodstock.
And then again that confession might have given Richard the temptation to act as he did. He didn't have to act to have them made illegitimate. Until he heard the confession he would have had no choice but to prepare for Edward's coronation, whatever his personal ambition. It's conceivable he felt duty bound to act as he did, but he certainly gained greatly from doing so.

How you get Henry Tudor as the prime suspect I don't know. He is a suspect for sure, but Richard is the prime suspect. He had means, opportunity and motive. They disappeared shortly after he was crowned. Henry only had a reason to kill them after he himself became King having defeated Richard. But that was over two years after they disappeared.

Obviously we don't know what happened for sure, but you can only go on the balance of probability. It's simply more likely Richard had them killed.
allafix is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 17-02-2013, 05:44
LaineyT
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In the corner with my laptop
Posts: 3,233
When this story first broke, my wife asked me "Why did they bury him under a car park ?"

I agree and how lucky was it to have the letter R over the top so they knew where to start digging
LaineyT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2013, 08:18
SallyArmy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Jasons yard
Posts: 6,861
There is a follow up documentary, Richard III The Unseen Story, on More4 Wednesday 27th February @ 9pm.
SallyArmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2013, 12:23
Cadiva
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In sunny (hah!) Yorkshire
Posts: 10,586
There is a follow up documentary, Richard III The Unseen Story, on More4 Wednesday 27th February @ 9pm.
Thanks for that Sally, will keep an eye out.
Cadiva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2013, 14:56
Tiggywink
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,915
More interesting than that is that he wasn't able to show them alive to prove he hadn't killed them. So they were almost certainly already dead. I think killing them as soon as he could after becoming king was probably the easiest and best solution for him. No risk of them escaping and trying to re-establish their claim.
The whole PR issue was tough for him. No, he couldn't show them to be still alive - the effect may have set off some kind of rebellious support on their behalf (which happened anyway). What would it have looked like, to supplant them, then parade them around?

Except that after the Princes are supposed to have disappeared, their mother let her daughters out of Sanctuary, where they'd holed up after her bid to keep power for her own family had failed, and where they could have stayed indefinitely, into Richard's custody with his promise to treat them as his close family and find them husbands according to their rank. Is it likely a mother would do that if she thought he'd killed her sons? Also she was allegedly involved in the Lambert Simnel uprising, which, if successful, would have removed her daughter from the throne. Not long after that Henry Tudor had her removed to a convent where she died 5 years later.
For a woman well known for acting in her own and her family's interest she did some odd things about that time.
BIB1 - Maybe she didn't know - maybe they weren't killed by him? Anyway, Richard arrived at the abbey with a force of soldiers and put her under extreme pressure. She must have been even more scared than she was when he seized power. It is so difficult to imagine the situation and how each of the protagonists felt. The family must have been desperate to get out of the confines of their sanctuary and he did promise to look after them. Elizabeth Woodville was an opportunist if nothing else.

BIB2 Well, by the time LS came along she probably did think her boys were dead. Who knows whether she had come to dislike Henry Tudor (have you his portrait ? Would you buy a used car from him?) If she replaced her daughter (therefore HT) with LS, she may have resumed some kind of influence upon the throne - but with Henry as king, no chance. In the end, her msitrust of him was confirmed - see nunnery.

Generally I think EW made it worse for herself. She made a mess of it all beginning with an attempted coup in 1483, stealing the king's treasure then running off into hiding - looks a bit guilty, don't you think?
Tiggywink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2013, 23:27
ocox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 735
When this story first broke, my wife asked me "Why did they bury him under a car park ?"


Blimey, thatís exactly what my wife said. meh
ocox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2013, 23:37
SueG
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 775
Blimey, thatís exactly what my wife said. meh
That's like the reports that American tourists asked why Windsor Castle was built so close to Heathrow airport.
SueG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:42.