Cold Case Reopened: The Princes in the Tower (6 page)

The proximity of the Abbey to the river meant that this was the most plausible means of getting York away. The distrust of Gloucester and the loyalty of many in the city to the queen meant that a changeling would have been relatively easy to find, especially when you consider she was armed with two-thirds of the royal treasure.

However, at this point the theory breaks down. The changeling is highly unlikely to have been an educated boy. In just a matter of weeks he would have needed to have fooled the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Howard and Gloucester himself into believing that he was a prince. It isn't completely beyond the realms of possibility but it does seem unlikely. The meeting with Gloucester in the Star Chamber would have been key in this deception. Gloucester was not a regular visitor to court. Instead, he spent the majority of time ruling the north for his brother. Would Gloucester have recognised his own nephew? Gloucester would probably have had his own suspicions that Elizabeth Woodville may have supplied a changeling and so that is why he wanted to meet the boy to confirm for himself that he really did have the Duke of York. It is likely that he would have questioned the boy to be sure of his identity. Despite the obstacles that come up against the theory there is still the possibility that the changeling managed to pull it off and managed to convince his captors that he was York.

There would still have been one further obstacle to come: the immediate reaction of the young king when presented with his “brother.” If Edward V had immediately responded with “who are you”, or words to that effect, then the cover would have been blown.

There have been numerous pretenders claiming to be Richard, Duke of York. The most notable was Perkin Warbeck. Warbeck was a thorn in the side of Henry VII for years. Warbeck had first appeared in Ireland claiming to be the youngest of the two princes and he was immediately embraced as the heir to the house of York. Warbeck even managed to convince other European heads of his claim, although their support may simply have been to agitate the King of England. Margaret of Burgundy supported his claim (she was the sister of Edward IV and Richard III). Warbeck's appearance from portraits does show a vague likeness to Edward IV. His knowledge of the English court and his “family history” was without fault. If he were not York, then he was a highly convincing impersonator.

Warbeck never claimed that his mother had switched him before getting him away. Instead, Warbeck said that he was shown pity by the murderers of his brother who sent him overseas. This would seem highly unlikely. Men who would murder one boy are hardly likely to show pity on another a few moments afterwards. The changeling theory would have been significantly more plausible.

After his capture, Warbeck confessed that he wasn't Edward IV's son. Henry VII had copies of the confession printed and distributed to further hammer home this fact. Of course, you might say that once captured you would confess to anything to avoid torture and a painful death, and so the confession is worthless.

It is interesting that all of the pretenders claimed to be the Duke of York and not Edward V. This was because this changeling theory was one that was often talked about.
 

The other point in favour of this theory is the fact that Elizabeth Woodville gave up the Duke of York to Gloucester. Some Ricardians suggest this was because she believed that he was in no danger. If this were the case then why were the Woodvilles in sanctuary at all? Either Woodville knew that the boy she was giving up wasn't her son or she knew that the troops would enter and take him anyway.

There isn't significant conclusive evidence either way. However, once again I am going with my gut feel and suggesting that a changeling was never offered. Trying to bluff Gloucester that the changeling was his nephew would have simply been too tall an order. The boy that was taken away from the abbey that day was indeed Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York. Once again Elizabeth Woodville was practicing self-preservation; she was giving up one child to protect the rest of the clan. If something did happen to her sons, then she would still be in possession of the next heir, her own daughter, Elizabeth of York.

1. Other theories regarding the fate of the princes
    
   

Of course there are other theories about the final fate of the princes. Some suggest that the princes were removed overseas, others that they were sent away to the country.
 

One theory is that the boys were sent up to Sheriff Hutton, in the heart of Richard's power base. This theory seems to have its basis in an entry in the household accounts about clothing for the
“Lord Bastard.”
However, this entry is more likely to refer to Richard III's own openly acknowledged illegitimate son, John of Gloucester rather than Edward V. However, it is not outside the realms of possibility that this entry could refer to Edward.

There is also an interesting theory that there is a hidden message in the portrait of the family of Sir Thomas More. The theory basically states that the man in the rear of the portrait standing underneath the fleur-de-ley canopy is actually Richard, Duke of York. In reality the man depicted is Dr. John Clement, a man who was brought up in More's household. The theory comes from the fact that the portrait has the words “
John, the rightful heir”
above the figure of Clement. We don't know much about Clement, but historians have poured scorn on these suggestions as the ages of both More and Clement simply don't compute in order for Clement to be York. The theory goes on to suggest that Edward V also survived the tower and turned himself into Sir Edward Guildford. There is little weight given to this theory by serious historians. It is all a bit too Da Vinci Code for me and is not something I would consider raising as an option in a case I was working on in the police. What the words
“John, the rightful heir”
actually mean are a mystery. Surely more appropriate wording might be “John, the rightful king” if the portrait was depicting Richard? One possible suggestion is that Clement was More's own bastard son. Maybe Dan Brown can answer the question with a blockbuster that is sure to outsell my own little effort.

The most interesting and mysterious of the alternative theories concerns a grave in a church in Kent. Eastwell Church near Ashford in Kent now stands in disrepair after bombing in the Second World War. However, within the church is a tomb that the records show contains a
Richard Plantagenet
. One possible theory until recently was that this was the final resting place of Richard III. However, we now know for certain that this isn't the grave of Richard III (he has spent many years under the car park in Leicester). So who is the Richard Plantagenet buried at Eastwell? Could it be that Richard Duke of York was taken to the country and lived a non-remarkable life, yet in death was buried under his real identity? There is little further evidence to go on other than a book written in the 18
th
century called
Desiderata Curiosa.
The book is a written record of local stories that had been told for centuries. The book tells that Richard Plantagenet was the bastard son of Richard III. A book written centuries later based on local legend and rumour doesn't count as compelling evidence in my mind. Richard Plantagenet of Eastwell remains an interesting figure. There may just be an outside possibility that he could be Richard, Duke of York. If the bones in Westminster Abbey and those in the vault of Edward IV proved not to be the princes, I would be very keen to investigate this particular tomb.

1. Conclusions
   

The changeling theory is certainly extremely plausible. Elizabeth Woodville would have been more than capable of devising a plan to make this happen. She also had the network in place that would have helped her. However, the number of people that would have had to have been duped would mean that, in my opinion, such an attempt would have had little chance of success. Gloucester met personally with York. This meeting was probably not for a pleasant, friendly uncle and nephew chat but more to ensure that this really was his brother's son. Gloucester would not have made the mistake of underestimating Elizabeth Woodville and so wanted to be completely satisfied that he now had the second son in his control.

So, based on the fact that I don't believe the changeling theory would have worked, I suggest that we have a murder case and the victims were the two princes. On the slim chance that a changeling was one of the two boys, then the murderer certainly believed their victim to have been the Duke of York. Whichever of the two scenarios is the case, we are still dealing with murder.

We need to study events after Richard III's coronation to see if there is any evidence that comes to light regarding the fate of the boys. This is not going to be as detailed a timeline as that after Edward IV's death. This will just show key events.

Early July 1483

More writes that all the princes normal servants are dismissed and four trusted men are appointed to guard them. Two of them are named as William Slaughter and Miles Forest.

17
th
July 1483

Sir Robert Brackenbury is appointed Constable of the Tower.

18
th
July 1483

Royal Warrant is issued commanding payment to thirteen men for their service to “Edward, bastard, late called Edward V.”

22
nd
July 1483

Richard III leaves London to go on progress, the ultimate destination being York.

Late July 1483

Sanctuary plot is hatched to attempt to get Edward IV's daughters to safety overseas.

29
th
July 1483

Richard III issues orders from Gloucester to stop the sanctuary plot succeeding.

30
th
July 1483

More suggests written order is sent by Richard III to Brackenbury to put the princes to death. Brackenbury refuses and sends this message back to the king.

Late July / Early August

Buckingham leaves Richard's progress for business on his own lands.

Early August

Buckingham either meets or begins correspondence with Margaret Beaufort. This quickly develops into a plot.

15
th
August 1483

More suggests this is the day that the murders took place. However, Tyrell is still with the king.

30
th
August 1483

Richard III and Anne Neville enter York.

Sir James Tyrell is dispatched to London in order to acquire robes for the investiture of Prince of Wales.

Sometime between 2nd and 4th September 1483

Sir James Tyrell is in London.

8
th
September 1483

Investiture in York of Prince of Wales. Sir James Tyrell is in York.

Mid September 1483

Margaret Beaufort brings Elizabeth Woodville into Buckingham's conspiracy and they agree that Henry Tudor will marry Elizabeth of York. Buckingham agrees to accept Henry Tudor as king.

24
th
September 1483

Around this date Buckingham writes to Henry Tudor inviting him to invade. He states the date for the enterprise as the 18
th
October.

3
rd
October 1483

Henry Tudor's fleet attempts to leave the continent but is driven back by storms.

10
th
October 1483

Rebellion starts in Kent. Norfolk, who is in London, blocks their path at Dartford.

Norfolk takes leaders prisoner and they tell of Buckingham's role.

12
th
October 1483

In Lincoln Richard III receives news of the Kent uprising and Buckingham's involvement by way of letter from Norfolk.
 

18
th
October 1483

Henry Tudor sets sail once again.

Buckingham starts his army's march from Wales with plan to reach additional forces south of the Severn.

19th October 1483

Richard III puts a price of £1000 on Buckingham's head.

24
th
October 1483

Richard III marches south to intercept Buckingham.

Bad weather hits Wales and South West England, slowing Buckingham's progress.

Late October 1483

Buckingham's forces begin to desert.

1
st
November 1483

Buckingham is captured.

2
nd
November 1483

Henry Tudor lands in England, but hearing news of the collapse of rebellion returns to the continent.

Buckingham is tried and executed at Salisbury.

Mid November 1483

Margaret Beaufort attainted and lands and property passed to her husband, Lord Stanley. Title of Countess removed.

25
th
December 1483

Henry Tudor swears vow in Rennes Cathedral to remove Richard III from the throne and marry Elizabeth of York.

23
rd
January 1484

Parliament meets and Titulus Regius is passed, formally confirming Richard's title as king and the illegitimacy of the children of Edward IV.

February 1484
 

Attempts are made to negotiate with Elizabeth Woodville about removing herself and her daughters from sanctuary.

1
st
March 1484

Richard III swears oath in Westminster not to harm or mistreat or imprison in the Tower of London the daughter of Elizabeth Woodville if they come out of sanctuary.

Early March 1484

Elizabeth of York and her sisters emerge from sanctuary. Elizabeth Woodville remains.