Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Toddsterpatriot
Tey makes the point that if a 20th century mystery writer can detect the truth about a 15th century murder, historians have no excuse to persist in writing in school textbooks that Richard murdered his nephews.

Remarkably large IF.

Nobody knows who murdered the little princes. The theory that Henry VII did it is based on the highly unlikely theory that Richard III would keep them locked up incommunicado as his support eroded because of suspicion he'd bumped them off.

13 posted on 01/12/2007 10:21:30 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan
Exactly my point.

It's fiction, and therefore can be constructed to prove anything.

Second-guessing history is an amusing pastime, but no more than that.

You make a good point re: Richard III keeping the princes locked up while public opinion turned against him. If he didn't do it, somebody working for him did ("Will nobody rid me of this troublesome priest?")

45 posted on 01/12/2007 12:39:44 PM PST by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson