Did King Richard III Really Murder His Own Nephews? | Fact Or Fiction | Timeline
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 мар 2018
- In this instalment, Tony Robinson goes in search of the truth about one of Britain's most maligned monarchs, Richard III. Robinson investigates whether Richard really did murder his two nephews, the Princes in the Tower, aged nine and 12, before usurping the throne. And if he did, what were his real motives? Robinson finds that much of what has been understood about Richard as historical fact turns out to be at best mistaken, at worst completely fabricated by subsequent generations. But just as his investigation is drawing to a close, an astonishing fact emerges that leads Robinson to question far more than just the received notions about Richard III. It calls into question the whole legitimacy of the last 500 years of British royalty.
It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service, at a huge discount using the code 'TIMELINE' ---ᐳ bit.ly/3a7ambu
You can find more from us on:
/ timelinewh
/ timelinewh
This channel is part of the History Hit Network. Any queries, please contact owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com
The music is not loud enough! I can still hear parts of the documentary :(
What's the point of releasing a music video with so much background noise ?!
Hahaha; I see what you are saying--reverse psychology........
Lol
@@hardygirl51 Are you blond?
@@hardygirl51 🤦♂️
@@mike62mcmanus ARE YOU?? That's not the proper way to spell it either.........
I thought the music was going to wake richard
😂😂😂😂😂
🤣🤣
Yes Wake King Richard Up To Make Love To You! Your Batty Boy Man Lover is Waiting For You!!!🤣😠🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😱🤭
@@alleynealisleem9777 There is something seriously wrong with you. Get help.
@@trudies4791 what do you mean!!!
Would have been a good documentary - if it was n't for that idiotic background music
Morteus can't agree more, it's soo irritating!
agreed
Yep, the editor and producer should be fired. I lasted 2 minutes.
@@circusbrains yeah more cowbell
Do you mean foreground music?
No one:
Absolutely no one:
Producers: let’s add some funky music so that no one can hear what he says :D
I AGREE WITH DAVID HENDERSON!!!!! What an educational, informative beautiful documentary that was 3/4 ruined by loud music, bird sounds, etc. drowning out Mr.Robinson!!! I was SO disappointed and aggravated!!! SHAME ON the producers on allowing this when it could have been a 5-STAR creation!!!!!!!
The original broadcast will have been fine sound wise. The freebie youtube video is a poor copy; you get what you pay for.
Great grandpa get some yearning aids it’s not that bad
Your caps lock and exclaimation buttion seems to be broken, they seem to keep coming on and off at random points and getting stuck
They never learn.
Totally agree
I can't hear anything but the loud music.
Many of these documentaries presented by Tony Robinson seem to suffer from miserable sound mixing.
The music's not bad I think... it's just that its placed as the forefront when it's the narrator who should be the most audible. 🤷♀️🤦♀️
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.😊
That music is so distracting. In parts I could hardly hear the narrator.
In some parts I couldnt hear him at all!
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Isn't background music supposed to be just that ?
Very good but the music is kind of loud.
very loud
Just what I was thinking!
Yes, too loud.
Yes. Mixed improperly
Do the editors not realize that the music drowns out the voiceover?!?!
If Richard killed Edwards sons, why did he not also kill George's son, whose claim to the throne was arguably stronger than his (Richards) - also, at the time of the alleged murder of the princes, the Constable of the Tower was Lord Stanley. No-one could have got to the boys without his knowledge. Stanley promised to fight for Richard at Bosworth, but in the event he reneged on that promise and stood off during the battle. Stanley was married to Lady Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry Tudor, later Henry 7th - what a coincidence!
EXACTLY. I say this all the time...Lord Stanley is always sus. And honestly, I believe he was hedging his vets. 1. He thought "hey. If they die, and Richard wins, maybe he'll have one less claim off his plate? And if Henry wins, he'll thank me". He was trying to determine he'd be in power regardless, before the Battle of Bosworth.
Perhaps cos it was also his wife’s nephew
And what a coincidence that Edward V & prince Richard were illegitimate, as well as their father & anyone who would’ve opposed Richard was executed. A lot of convenient coincidences put Riii on the throne
If Richard had killed his nephews, he would have declared they died of one of the many diseases endemic to children, had Masses said for their souls and given them proper and public burials. Elizabeth Woodville’s daughters would have had every right to the crown with their brothers dead. Richard never showed anything but kindness to them and to their mother. When Bishop Stillington revealed that he had plight trothed Edward and Eleanor Butler he obviously had some kind of evidence. Richard had nothing to do with this announcement. He was not even at the meeting. Far from killing George’s son, after his own son died, Richard was planning to remove George’s attainder and make young Edward his heir. Edward was later executed by Henry VIII. Between Henry VII and Henry VIII, all of the Yorkist heirs were killed. The only two whose fates remain unknown are Edward and Richard, Edward IV sons. There is an entry in the account rolls of Margaret of Burgundy of money paid for the raising of Yorkist children (or heirs, I’ve seen both words used). Who were these children?k
@@lyndsaycrawford Richard had very few people executed. His worst move was forgiving Stanley and his wife, Margaret Beaufort.
I’m guessing someone was having too much fun with his synthesizer? Wayyyyy to much 😂
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Let's put Richard in some perspective.
William the Conqueror depopulated Yorkshire.
John, numerous murders, including his nephew Arthur, the true heir.
Edward I, numerous slaughters in Wales and Scotland.
Edward III, started Hundred Years War.
Richard II, arbitrarily deprived Henry, Duke of Lancaster of his inheritance, sowing the seeds of his own deposition which would lay the foundations for the Wars of the Roses.
Henry V, who re-kindled the Hundred Years War, leading to
slaughters of French civilians.
Edward IV, who would have numerous opponents put to death for treason, without trial, people who had never sworn fealty to him, staying true to Henry VI. He also had Henry VI bludgeoned to death in the Tower, soon after the battle of Tewksbury had seen the death of Henry's only son and the capture of his Queen. Henry never abdicated, or was 'tried' in any way. Murder was unnecessary.
I am not a Ricardian. He was a ruthless man, who saw the boys lives as his death, by the Woodville faction, and who would seek to atone for his sins by funding an unprecedented number of chantries to placate his God, and by attempting some reforms.
But, it was not enough to keep those who believed he had killed the boys from overthrowing him.
Many of his older brother Edward IV's servants would seek vengeance by means of a relatively obscure exile.
So, as tyrants go, there were certainly worse.
I wouldn't put Henry VII in that category, unless you include the pecuniary measures, fines, suspended sentences. He disliked shedding blood unnecessarily: witness his mercy with Lambert Simnel, and, at first, with Perkin Warbeck, and, for quite a while, with Warwick.
To secure the Spanish Marriage for Prince Arthur and the succession, he 'tried' Warbeck and Warwick for conspiracy and treason and put them to death. He, too, likely felt that it may have cursed his son, in the end.
But the worst thing he did was to bring Henry VIII into being. There's your tyrant. Many thousands killed
just in the case of The Pilgrimage Of Grace.
If Richard had been victorious at Bosworth, he likely would have been seen as a ruthless but just ruler, who had come to the throne by unfortunate means. There certainly had been (and would be) much worse.
If I was wealthy, I would pay someone like you to teach me history. I'm trying to learn, at this late date, with my thick old noggin. I've learned some, enough to follow what you've said and remember most of it from other knowledge. But you have a far more ranging perspective than I do, because you know so much more. I aspire to be like you. So, for whatever it's worth, you're a teacher, a guide, and a hero to someone. Carry on!
All this is true. The problem is looking at it through modern eyes, a futile endeavor, unless you understand the medieval mind. You don’t even have to understand it, but to realize they thought completely different than we do now.
Lies..
Just like the white washing. If he did kill someone’s it was in self defense. Probably an intruder trying to steal his property, land or someone else..
John Ward City on a Hill or Winthrop mean friendly village,
The messenger. Or Allah you pick.
The grandfather of Richard Ward
Dr. Coe, I presume? 🤗 Great overview of a subject I've only learned in quilt pieces... and from a certain playwright, I'll confess. Thanks for the micro lesson in Richard
I wish I could word my thoughts and conclusions as well as you. Couldn't agree more.
I’ve always loved Tony Robinson. Shame I can’t hear him though.
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Actually sod all to do with uploading to RUclips, it’s on their original.
wtf I really wanted to enjoy this documentary but the loud music is overwhelming the narration, smh what an amateur production
lol im DOP on this? ur acc peak
its just at the beginning
This came just in time for my work break. Thank you!
Lovely to see you here!
The vocal and music tracks are way out of balance.
ruined by the loud music
Gave up on this as the crappy music was drowning the words. Whoever edited it ought to be made to listen to it on an endless loop!
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
So I'm assuming this documentary was created before they found his bones in the parking lot?
lacouerfairy yes
lacouerfairy Car Park, Dear. We are British!
@@chris7921 the best part of watching that documentary of them exhumation of the bones was seeing that woman from the Richard The 3rd society’s dreams crushed when the proved he was indeed a hunch back.
@@llcoollee5075 He wasn’t a hunchback, he had scoliosis. My cousin has scoliosis and it’s not medically considered to be a hunchback, you can barely see the difference between someone with scoliosis and someone with the usual placed spine.
@@llcoollee5075 my god that woman was an overly dramatic, wet blanket lol I admire her passion but can you imagine working with her, you can see in that documentary everyone is constantly on eggshells incase she starts having a breakdown lol unprofessional and awkward at best
Very interesting documentary - but wish they'd KILL the stupid, intrusive music!
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
In the painting of Richard 111 he looks in pain not mean.
@ Karen Cawthorn
He may have been in pain, his skeleton showed he had scoliosis and arthritis in his spine.
I went to a concert the other night, and a documentary broke out.
The sound is atrocious. It made following the documentary nearly impossible and, at times, uncomfortable.
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
But it turns out he was deformed by scoliosis. When they recovered the body there it was.
Na not really 'deformed', he just had one shoulder higher than the other. Scoliosis isn't that bad
Lisa Maria Wilhelmine scoliosis can be extremely severe and cause incredible deformity. I’ve seen a case where the young woman’s ribs on one side met her pelvis.
@@PomegranateStaindGrn yeah I know that I have scoliosis too but the case you described is an extreme case. And it's known that the Tudors and Shakespeare were propaganda Masters against Richard lll. So it's likely that they exaggerated too when they said that he had a hump
Scoliosis can be corrected and aided with braces, which they would have been capable of creating. Plus, the training of the time would have forced him to stand straight, ride, and battle. The documentary popularly known comparing a modern young man with scoliosis with Richard is deeply flawed in its conception. And one high shoulder doesn't make him a hunchback cripple. The most recent portrayal - by Benedict Cumberbatch - is extreme and likely exaggerated.
@Felix Ray you said all this much more clearly than I was about to. Thanks.
Throw the complete soundtrack away and you'd have the beginnings of a good documentary
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
background music is NOT in the background. Drowns out narration in parts, Pretty annoying if you are interested in the topic
Timeline always outdoes itself with food for thought! Thank you again Tony Robinson!
The music ruins everything how can this be so badly done?
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
The audio is so distracting! Imbalanced and unnecessary background music.
Can't watch anymore. THe music!!!!
Did you guys not proof watch this before releasing it? Lol.
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Thanks for this. Exciting information and well done too. I coped with the music issue that so many complain of. Just turn up your volume to hear the narration. It works!! Thanks again ☺
Why is the music so loud? I can't hear some of what the presenter is saying because it drowns his voice out several times. Plenty of other videos you have uploaded don't have this issue. It there any way you guys could fix it?
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
All the background sounds & music drowns out the voice over.
Annoying
Allow me to add: I’m re-reading Josephine Tey’s wonderful book on Richard third called: “The Daughter Of Time” And there’s plenty in it which tends exonerate him from being the 2 nephews killer.
There is that entry in Margaret of Burgundy’s account rolls of money allocated “for the raising of Yorkist heirs”. We know what happened to the family of York after Bosworth. HenryVII killed most of them and HenryVIII wiped out the couple that remained. It was the Tudors who were murderous monsters, not Richard.
Daughter of Time is a wonderful book, that was very popular over 50 years ago and opened up many discussions of was Richard 111 vilified by Shakespeare.
It’s historical fiction which means she had the advantage of not having to stick to the facts & logistics when it suited the plot.
Sound is bad, the music is far too loud
When I try to fairly evaluate Richard III, leaving aside the two princes, what stick in my craw are the murders of Rivers and Hastings.
I can understand River's, he was one of the hated Woodvilles, but Hastings...
Beheaded without trial or even a priest to confess, and so publicly.
Um.That bothers me too & I am a Ricardian.Diccon did blame Edward's early death on Hastings.But Vaughn,Richard Grey & the extremely talented Anthony Rivers were only carrying out Elizabeth's orders
Rivers and Hastings were both tried and convicted. Richard was not present at either trial Rivers was attempting to take Richard’s position as Lord Protector and Hastings conspired with Morton, Stanley and Jane Shore to assassinate Richard.
@@susanmccormick6022They took their chances and lost.
Hastings was tried a week after his arrest. He was convicted of treason.
Background music is much to loud
impossible to understand......the music is annoying . The documentary, thought provoking
Terrible sound track. Music exceedingly distracting and very strange, given the subject matter.
Oi ! Robinson why are you not wearing gloves when handling those historic books !
I absolutely agree with David Sexton, gloves should have been worn when handling those historical books, they of course are absolutely irrepleaceable, and with Richard Duke of Gloucesters signiture on them!!
@@johnentwhistlesurelysamsun1840 In the burial of Richard III the priest (I don’t know if it was a priest, I’m just gonna say the priest) was holding a prayer book that used to be Richards’ without gloves and I was so annoyed.
Well, he would have been following instructions. A lot of archives now won’t let you wear gloves so don’t blame him unless you know the full story.
the tudors right from their graves deliberatley raised the volume of the background noise here, so nobody gets to know about the details surrounding the unsolved "death" of the two too-young-to-be-kings
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Even the crows are louder than the speakers!
Aah, Timeline: home of the botched audio docs.
Nice try, Mr.Robinson. Everybody knows that Richard III was killed by Prince Blackadder, and some man called Baldrick was helping him to cover it up
😂😂😂
Since discovery of the children's bone couldn't they too be DNA tested???
Horrible sound track mixing is becoming too common with these newly-posted docs on YT. The issues are always the same: music is TOO LOUD, the narrator's voice is too low, and other dialog goes up and down in volume, making adjustments necessary every 30 seconds. It ruins what would otherwise be a good viewing experience. Do the people who re-mix these TV docs for the Internet not know what they are doing with the audio? Are they hiring deaf people to do the work?
If you ever do music or video editing, you'll find out that exported results look and sound differently in different devices. The sound might work great in the uploader' s computer but became terrible in our product due to the different decoding protocols. And the uploader may be too lazy to reedit the audio and upload a new video, so we have what we have. Hope that explains it. The music is also terrible in my device, but I can at least hear the voices, so I focus on that. Luckily, this is not a movie.
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Music too loud. Can’t hear the narrator. 🤷🏽♀️
I cant even watch the rest of this because the damn music is so freaking loud, its given me a migraine.
I “love” Richard III. After seeing his skeleton being found, researching and watching his reburial, I think he was badly portrayed and unfairly maligned in history.
To the extent possible so far, everything negative said about Richard III has been proven to be true.
@@C-eo1rt actually he didn’t try to prove it which would have looked much better on his part. He could have taken steps to prove it and investigated all available contemporary sources like the woman’s family who he claimed was pre contracted to his brother prior to Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth woodville, or requesting the papal authorities to investigate the claims made by the priest he said performed the alleged ceremony. Only making these claims after his brother’s death and the death of alleged bride who could have given testimony, removing and or executing any members of the privy council and relatives of the dowager Queen who would object, it’s pretty obvious he wasn’t looking for truth he was looking for power. I have no idea if he murdered his nephews but he did imprison them and he had charge of them when they disappeared and anyone who has studied history knows that if you don’t eliminate any threats to your rule as king, you run the risk of leaving someone for people to get behind in order to overthrow you.
How do you come to that conclusion from seeing a skeleton??
Annie Mars - Why? Serious question.
evil piggy!! 🤡
So, even if Edward the Fourth was illegitimate, he still would have been King by right of Conquest. I quote from the movie "The King".... " all monarchies are illegitimate"
Edward IV was not illegitimate. He was born three weeks early. All of my kids were born three weeks early and they all weighed over 8 pounds. No medieval noble woman would cheat on her husband before the first son. Cecily Neville travelled with her husband constantly. They obviously had a happy marriage.According to English common law, no child born to a married woman can be illegitimate.
You did not look into this too far .Evidence is firmly set in the words of Bishop Morton. Richard was framed to set a new King on our throne . Richard was an able bodied fighter .His twisted spine did not affect his ability to swings a sword or ride a horse as he had a full stable
@@C-eo1rt didn't his unearthed skeleton PROVE that he did indeed have scoliosis ? There is a very interesting video about a remarkable young man, named Dominic, who shares Richard's diagnosis, and who illustrates clearly that one man's debilitating condition is another man's opportunity to shine. In other words, Richard would not necessarily have been "disabled" to the extent that his affliction was obvious.
Evidence is a word that is thrown around far too easily where this case is concerned. Most “evidence” I’ve been directed to regarding Ricardian theories are never peer reviewed or been subject to any academic scrutiny. What you’re actually saying is he didn’t look into enough to suit your narrative or some romanticised idea of Richard being set up.
@@leanie5234 Usain Bolt also has scoliosis. He has to adjust his stride to accommodate it.
Lyndsaycrawford, To what evidence do you refer?
Richard led the military from the age of 17.
Interesting story...but the loud sound effects and music are louder than the dialogue in some spots
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
The sound of music overwhelmed the speaking of the narrator. Very aggravating to say the least. 😪
That was awesome! Happy Hogmanay to you and Teka, and Hapoy New Year too!🎉
Omg..... Why is that music so loud?
Auto generated translation help me a lot since the music background louder than Richard III.
Thanks
wow the music is so loud :o
Music is so loud, I can’t heard the words. Why?
unwatchable due to sound levels and music interference.
I can’t watch this until they fix the music . . . It’s dreadful !!!
Background music is so loud I can't hear what Tony is saying
Background music is way too loud!!
Loved the content. Use of background music had me going "Huh?" a bunch of times.
No, had to leave it at 8 mins. Music way too loud!! Shame!!!
Funny thing was, Baldrick (Tony Robinson) picked up Richard III's head after Blackadder killed his grand uncle. lol
Interesting subject,but all I can hear is the Damm music !!
I would not credit that as music.
good documentary. but the music makes me couldn't heard what tony was saying
Needs subtitles. That music is too loud..
Is this a music video or documentary 😡 I bloody hate music in documentaries!!
2018!! TODAY 2020 AND THIS BACKGROUND MUSIC STILL HASN'T BEEN TAKEN AND EDITED. Please change this.
The background music needs to be turned down alot
well now we know he was buried by the monastary, never dug up, and never thrown away so how much of this tale is true as well?
I love Tony Robinson. I think there should be a Tony Robinson appreciation club.
My boss worked for him for a time.
I don't know the thought process behind adding the music to the video. The music is horribly annoying and WAY too loud. I really hope you didn't pay someone to ruin the video because that's exactly what the music did.
Seems more like a defective tv stereo. The television in my bedroom does this as well. On one documentary, the seagulls were so loud that the dialogue was unintelligible. This was due to a disconnected speaker inside the cabinet. Easy fix.
This music was added as a means to stop me from hearing Tony.
Love Tony Robinson, a brilliant story teller .
Darn it!! Wanted to watch this, but the music is so loud! Can barely hear the narrator
Not only is the music too loud, so are the battle noises, the birds, and any other background noise. Sometimes all you hear is a whisper from Tony. Tony makes for excellent documentaries, too bad the sound engineer is not as good. Doesn't' anyone review a program before putting it out there? Such a shame I feel like I missed a lot. To bad the CC's aren't any good either, because that's just another way to go, if your not hearing what's being said.
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.
Unhelpful additional comment about the music.
Too bad, can't hear him especially over the music, Tony & the Beefeater at the Tower. Dreadful.
Music too loud!! Couldn't hear Tony
The music is soooo loud. Couldn’t hear a thing
Looked like a brilliant documentary sounded bloody awful. Couldn’t hear anything over that music!!
Do we even know for sure they were murdered?
Apologies for the REALLY late reply, but I think as far as any historian knows, Edward and Richard went into the Tower in 1483 and never came out.
@@britc.3536I think Richard sent the boys to his sister , Margaret of Burgundy. There was an entry, in her account rolls, of money allocated for the raising of Yorkist heirs. There were only two heirs of the House of York unaccounted for.
Can't deal with the background music and animal sounds... :(
Dude had severe scoliosis and was in severe pain
The skeleton shows KRIII had a crooked back, scoliosis. But that does not equal a hump, it just means leaning to one side.
And if he wore enough clothing or had it specially made, as was often the case, none would have been the wiser.
Great video but some of the music is louder than the talking
Ugh!!! BYE!!! That freaking music
The music isn’t background sound,it’s drowning out what you are saying
Now we know why libraries are so quiet! 🥴
I don't think the bad things Richard did can be excused by pointing to the time he lived. As no doubt future people could do the same for us. How ever I think the lesson is most people aren't either completely good or bad. Richard being a great example of that. And I do mean great.
Msdjessa, Bad things? Such as what? Before you go on about his nephews, be aware that there is zero evidence that Richard did anything of the sort. In fact, if they were killed at all, it was more likely that Buckingham or Margaret Beaufort did it.
@@Moose.-vy5yeI think Richard sent the boys to his sister in Burgundy after Henry Tudor’s first attempt to invade England. I think Edward died from the abscess in his jaw and that young Richard emerged as Perkin Warbeck.
There’s no evidence that Richard did “bad things”. He was considered, at the time, to be a progressive and benevolent king.
I think Richard iii is a fantastic example of being a man of his time. & no one is simply good or bad! We just need to be aware that life was far more brutal back then & the peerage were the most vulnerable. Especially , with the war of the roses still happening, power was fleeting
Firstly, I believe Edward iv made a grave mistake giving Rivers guardianship & naming Richard lord protector, Edward V hardly knew his uncle Richard & would’ve definitely formed a bond with the men raising him ( Rivers & Vaughan) Edward iv should’ve had Richard raise him. With the civil war still looming, when Edward iv died, I believe Richard knew there was a power vacuum & he had to get custody of the young king cos if he didn’t he would’ve probably been executed or exiled himself as he would always be viewed as a threat by the Woodville faction. And they did have great influence over the young king & held a lot of powerful positions. (A bit of nepotism would’ve probably served Edward iv better tbh) I believe Richard underestimated just how much influence & how close he’d became with his guardians. I also believe he misread the nobles who were extremely loyal to Edward iv & expected nothing more than to crown his eldest son & heir. No one would’ve wanted another civil war.
Imo Riii ended up with no other choice & he seemed to exhaust every avenue before turning to having them killed , imo, I do believe it came down to him or them & Machiavelli would say that was acting in self defence. He was in very real danger if he did nothing so it’s like politicking but one wrong move & you’re dead. In medieval times it was possible to be a decent king , celebrated war hero, brilliant guy n still get rid of claimants to the throne. Especially when they’re likely to inspire rebellion.
That’s why I think he was a man of his time because it was dog eat dog & ppl had to do things & make decisions we couldn’t comprehend never mind relate too.
Am I crazy or does this documentary completely skip over the fact that Edward the fourth named Richard the Lord Protector? That’s kind of an important fact?
What's wrong with the sound? Can barely hear Tony yet the music is loud.
The music track is so overpowering, unnecessary, and obnoxious!
You've done a fascinating man a terrible disservice through your audio editing. The incidental music is far too loud for me to properly hear the narration. Moving on to some other video now.
Interesting documentary. Of course some facts are have now been proven to be true. Richard did have a severe form of scolosis. However through all the layers of the time, it could hardly been seen. I think the people who knew of it that were still at court in the Tudor times drastically overplayed the "hunchback". We now know that he was buried in what is now a carpack in Leicestershire. I'm glad at least this documentary mention Henry Tudors mother had a motive. However, why has no one mention Richards wife Anne. She was Queen, the king makers daughter and had a lot of power. Perhaps she has a lot more to do with this than we might think. She could easily have access to the Tower or order someone to kill the boys. Plus since Richard had always been loyal why the quick change of character? The playing nice and then completely changing after a little time leaving the room? Could someone been quietly manipulating him behind the scenes like Anne? I guess we will never know. Also Henry Tudors claim is through his mother not his father. His mother's line was legitimize by the pope so he did have a proper claim. The "spoiling" of the line by Elizabeth of York would not really matter. Besides the current royal family's claim is based on Sophia of Hanover so it wouldn't really matter. Plus just because Richard Duke of York was like the documentary said not there at the proper "time" does not mean Edward was not conceived later and born early but happened to survive. Perhaps not all documentation survived from the Cathedral. We just don't know. Anyway good documentary overall. The music and scene sound was way too high and could hardly hear the narrator.
My feeling is that Buckingham had the boys murdered it is highly possible he hated the Woodvilles since he was fond of idea that someone of his rank had been forced to marry a lowly Woodville. After the Hastings execution Buckingham was in charge of Morton a staunch Lancastrian supporter. Buckingham was constable of England and would most probably had access to the tower. After having a falling out with Richard, who was on royal progress, he went to his estates in Brecon and released Morton who went to Henry Tudors Mother.
What would Anne have to gain from their murder? Plus, she may have been the Kingmakers daughter and was extremely wealthy, which made her powerful, but she didn’t seem to hold any political influence and probably didn’t want too. Plus she wasn’t that manipulative or scheming as people make out to be.
You know I don't even know where to begin! There are so many things that I disagree with! But mainly you are trying to imply that others had a motive to kill those two little boys and that is outrageous! Others at the time barely had extremely vague motives at best! It was Richard Plantagenet Duke of Gloucester who was behind the disappearance and murders of the two boys. It does not matter if he had a servant kill them and none of the other facts surrounding this really matter that much either. Richard killed them, had them killed, whatever, and that is absolutely unconscionable. Whatever good he may have done, whatever rights he may have had, have been blackened by his actions towards those two boys. Simple as that!!! This may be the internet but one should still have good and careful grammar although I have seen a lot worse.
@@phyllisruthmick5391 Those accusing Richard of murdering his own nephews should explain what reasons Richard had for murdering them. They should also explain the dramatic change exhibited by Richard: from his brother's right-hand man to the plotting tyrant intent on dispossessing King Edward IV's heirs, if that is indeed the case. What motives would Richard have for murdering his own nephews? He was already king, Parliament had acceded to it. Even if he claimed that they had died in captivity, as was done with Richard II and Henry VI, it would have suggested that he was a murderer. Moreover, their disappearance (and neither Richard III nor Henry VII ever made a statement about the fate of the two princes) would make it seem like Richard was insecure about his own legitimacy and security on the throne. Richard had his other nephew (the Duke of Clarence's son) and his nieces (Edward IV's daughters) under his wardship, and they were perfectly safe and comfortable. As the video says, it was customary for the incoming monarch to reside at the Tower prior to their coronation. Young Richard was probably there as well to keep the two of them secure from plots (and there seems to have been an assault on the Tower). Both the Duke of Buckingham and Lord Stanley held the office of Lord Constable, in which position, they had authority over the operations of the Tower. Buckingham's motives for murdering the princes are obscure, but, then, so is Buckingham's career. He was outside the coterie of power during Edward's reign, despite his rank and marriage to the queen's sister. He was given great authority and wealth by Richard, but he nonetheless revolted against Richard's rule and cast his lot with Henry Tudor. He was also a descendant of Edward III, like all the contenders for the throne during the Wars of the Roses. Lord Stanley was of course married to Henry Tudor's mother, and being the step-father of the king is better than being a mere servant of the king. Stanley was a turncoat with regularity, switching sides and pledging loyalty to the winner of the battle after the fact. Buckingham and Stanley both had opportunity to kill or "disappear" the princes, they both had close affiliation with the throne, and they both acted as traitors. Their characters and motives single them out as more likely culprits in the disappearance of the two princes compared to Richard.
@@idontgiveafaboutyou true
Wow... Love the story and the presentation....... but the background noise drove me crazy 🤪......
I'm glad I read the comments about the sound quality first--I was actually prepared to listen carefully. Other than that, a lot of great information!
The problem is the RUclips audio processing algorithms, not the original production.