White Princess

[lucydogz]

Anyone else watched this? I watched the 1st out of curiousity but have given up as there's only so much of (the actress playing) Elizabeth of York flouncing around in cloisters with a sulky expression I can take, and the weird slant that Phillippa Gregory puts on historical fact is barking.

I enjoy it and I enjoyed the white queen and the Tudors but I don't kid myself it is historically accurate. Just as tv series about other historical characters is rarely accurate.

I read a lot of 'factual' history too - but even that is not reliable as it is influenced by the politics and the threats to safety of the authors at the time of writing too.

"History is written by the victors" or "a set of lies agreed upon" are fairly accurate quotes - one by a 'hero' another by a 'villain'

""History is written by the victors" or "a set of lies agreed upon""

Absolutely.

Would love to know what really happened to the Princes in the Tower.

The Tudors had far more reason to kill the York princes than their York uncle. Not saying Richard wasn't ambitious but he could have kept them illegitimate to stay on then throne he didn't need to kill them whereas the Tudors needed them and Richard dead to claim the throne

Yeah, but while ever they were alive they would've been a figurehead for whatever faction wanted to get a hold of the throne.

I think all the new clamaints had a reason for wanting them dead, including Richard III. And of course, there's always the chance they died of natural causes as well, slight as that might be.

Well yes lots of illness and if they'd been injured in some way they could've died from that too. There is a theory they died from illness/accident and Richard felt he had to hide the bodies as he'd have been accused of murder. Without the bodies and no kind of proof there would be rumours but nothing more.

" but while ever they were alive they would've been a figurehead for whatever faction wanted to get a hold of the throne."

That's the thing, isn't it?

Had Henry's mum/Jasper been pushing for him since he was a kid when he had no say in it?

Also, when Richard first became regent, his son was still alive wasn't he & he might rather have handed to his son rather than back to his brother's?

He was screwed either way I think with them dying whilst in his "protection".

I like the theory that an ambitious courtier heard someone important say something that indicated they wished the princes were dead.

So they killed them, hoping to use it to curry favour. "Look what I'm willing to do for you".

Then the important person's reaction was not at all as the courtier expected. So they didn't own up to it. So nobody important knew they'd done it.

None of the people who would benefit from the deaths explicitly ordered it.

'I like the theory that an ambitious courtier heard someone important say something that indicated they wished the princes were dead.

So they killed them, hoping to use it to curry favour. "Look what I'm willing to do for you".'

That's certainly plausible. It was also theorised this is how Lord Darnley met his end, although he certainly did far more than the princes in the tower did to lose friends and alienate people.

Thomas a Becket's murder might have come about due to such a remark or two as well.

"I wish the goblins would come and take those princes away"

'Will no one rid me of these troublesome princes!'

Richard III's skeleton did show evidence of some pretty dire injuries. Pretty amazing that crazy lady pinned down where he was buried, under bay 'R', of all places.

Pretty amazing that crazy lady pinned down where he was buried, under bay 'R', of all places

Yes, you've got to admire her tenacity really (although it's more than a bit weird that she was obviously in love with someone who'd been dead for more than 500 years ).

I still think Richard's final resting place should've been York though.

The Tudors had far more reason to kill the York princes than their York uncle

They didn't actually. I don't know why people think Richard wouldn't have anything to gain by killing them. The boys had been declared illegitimate but they wouldn't have stayed boys for very long. All it would've taken was an army with the backing of a powerful noble or foreign King and they could've tried to take the throne back. God knows their father did it at 18.

Tudors needed them and Richard dead to claim the throne

They also needed Richard's son and Richard's nephews dead.

There is no evidence that Margaret Beaufort killed the princes - she was miles away under house arrest - and her son wasn't even in the country at the time they disappeared.

I didn't say Richard had nothing to gain, but that the Tudors had stronger motives.

And if it were the Tudors no reason they wouldn't have planned to continue killing if Henry vii didn't get the throne at bosworth.

As for alibis they're no proof when there were any number of supporters would have done it for them.

The Princes were held in the Tower - the most secure fortress in England. People couldn't just waltz in and out of it willy-nilly.

Seriously, go read an actual history book rather than Philippa Gregory or the equally turgid Sunne in Splendour.