‘The Two Princes Edward and Richard in the Tower’, by Sir John Everett Millais, 1878 (The Royal Holloway picture collection )
New scientific research could finally solve one of Britain’s most controversial historical mysteries.
Geneticists have succeeded in obtaining a sample of DNA that could ultimately prove whether the medieval English King Richard III was guilty or innocent of murdering the two children of his predecessor, Edward IV – the so-called Princes in the Tower.
The discovery of the crucial modern DNA is…
via New DNA sample could prove whether Richard III was guilty of murdering the ‘Princes in the Tower’ | The Independent
Antony Sher as Richard III for the Royal Shakespeare Company 
The performances of Shakespeare’s Richard III scheduled to take place inside Leicester Cathedral on 19th and 20th July 2017 are causing waves. There can be little doubt that the size and extent of …
Source: Leicester, Middleham and That Play | Matt’s History Blog
Lady Margaret Beaufort
Historical opinion often moves in circles on certain topics. Sometimes it’s a slow process and sometimes it happens quickly. The White Queen series stirred up the latent and under-examined but long…
Source: Margaret Beaufort and the Princes in the Tower | Matt’s History Blog
I read a series of blog posts recently that sought to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Richard III ordered the deaths of his nephews. Whilst I don’t take issue with holding and arguing this viewpoint I found some of the uses of source material dubious, a few of the accusations questionable and some of the conclusions a stretch. There are several issues with the narrow selection of available sources that continually bug me. It is no secret that any conclusive evidence one way or another is utterly absent but I have issues with the ways the materials are frequently used.
Sir Thomas More
There are four main sources that are often used, two contemporary and therefore primary sources and two near-contemporary which are habitually treated as primary. The farthest away in time from the events that it describes is also the one traditionally treated as the most complete and accurate account, which in itself should urge caution. Sir Thomas More is believed to have started writing his History of King Richard III around 1513 when he was an Undersheriff of London and the first thing to note is that he never actually published the work. It was completed and released in 1557 by More’s son-in-law William Rastell. It is unclear what…
Source: Usurpation, Murder and More | Matt’s History Blog