Mariette said

Olga said

Thanks Bella, found it It’s in print too I just can’t get it here

Olga, it’s 42% off at Book Depository at the moment if you can’t find it here.
http://www.bookdepository.com/…..0007309290

The paperback is available now
http://www.bookdepository.com/…..0007309306

Olga said

I never can pick between paperbacks and hardcovers Thanks Mariette, I have to get my Cromwell book from overseas too as they are still not shipping it to the suppliers here for some mysterious reason.

Bella I have been chatting to a new friend who is heavily into WOTR and she recommended reading the general books first before getting into the detailed biographies, she also said that was a good read.

Just on the remains of the Princes, I read something on the internet the other day that said the bones were found far too deep (I think it said 10 feet) for the hasty sort of burial they would have had. It is an interesting though, if they were down that far they could have dated to Roman times. We’ve got no DNA to prove it is them either.

I will check out that link to the Thomas More painting, thanks Mariette. Looks interesting!

If the boys were buried that deep Olga, that to me at least says that their deaths were planned and the grave was already dug. A hasty burial I would have thought would have I should think would be about 3ft, as it would certain have to be done in a hurry. I’m sort of half inclined to think that the bones found in Charles 2nd’s reign were not of the boys at all. Until the Queen’s permission is granted for DNA testing on the bones found back then (and remember we do now at have King Richard’s bones to prove it one way or another) I think there will always be an element of doubt to just whose bones they are. It does seem very strange to me that their bodies would just be dumped under an unused or little used stairwell, which was then quickly filled in by rubble.
Something else as well when the pretenders came along why wasn’t E.W brought to court to identify them, she would have known them inside out and back to front, next to Queen Elizabeth. Had E.W simply excepted that her boys were dead? or was she told to keep right out of it.

Bo I don’t think they would have been able to dig down that far without some sort of supporting structure, it could not have been done in secret and it would have taken ages. If the bones were in fact found buried that deeply you would have to conclude they were not the prince’s remains. When they were last looked at there was no testing done on the age of the bones, only a confirmation they were males and probably a certain age.

The theory is Elizabeth Woodville knew Richard of York was alive. She had been pretty much banished to an abbey at that point (which didn’t stop her funding rebellions against Henry VII) and Henry wanted her safely out of the way.

Oh good Mariette I’ve been meaning to read mine but I haven’t gotten around to it yet. I am now crossing my fingers my Scofield will arrive in a couple of weeks…
I understand where the Queen is coming from on that in one respect but it would certainly either put a lot of minds to rest or give us something to argue about for a few centuries more.

Boleyn said

I’m inclined to think that the bones foound in Charles 2nd time are not of the Princes, but that the boys bones have yet to be discovered.

Boleyn, I agree with you.

In short we need to solve this mystery of the bones. Now we have their Uncle’s DNA there is no reason to why thse bones can’t be tested. Of course the final say so comes from the Queen on that one.
If the bones turn out to be the boys, then at least they can be given all due respect etc, but it still won’t solve who did actually kill them or how they died, or was it done on the sly or with the full backing of someone? If the bones aren’t the boys then we have yet another riddle to solve. Where are they. Is there a chance there bodies would have been chucked in the moat?.

If the princes were murdered and their bodies weighted down and thrown into the Thames they would be very unlikely to have been found. Sadly, I don’t think we’ll ever know for certain what happened to the two princes or who was responsible for their murder/disapperance but DNA testing would certainly put a lot of minds to rest. If the bones in Westminster Abbey turned out not to belong to the princes, I wonder what would happen next.

Yes I agree Bob. Granted today a 10 foot hole would only take a hour or so with a suitable backhoe or whatever the cockamayme things are called, but back then it would have taken a least a week maybe more with 2 people let alone one person. So Yes I think we can sort of safely say that the bones found in Charles 2nd time, are extremely suspect.
Again you are quite right with the DNA testing after this length of time the only DNA testing they could do on the suspect bones would be microcondial DNA testing. Are there any actually living decentdants (apart from the Queen) to the Woodvilles alive today? Because if there was the problem/riddle of the bones could easily be solved without too much hassle I’m sure the Queen would give the old green light as they wouldn’t need to jab a needle in her bum to get a sample of her blood, althought they generally rely on mouth swabs now I think.
It would be very intersting though to find out the truth once and for all.

Yep true Bob. I rather think that it won’t be in our lifetimes that the monarch will agree to DNA testing. I don’t know what the Duke of Cambridge feels about it. To be honest I don’t reckon Jug ears (Prince charles) should have the throne after the Queen anyway, he’s far too staid and old hat for today’s generation. We need a monarch who is more in touch today’s sociaty, and I think the Duke of Cambridge should rule after the Queen. Maybe he would allow the boffins to take DNA samples and solve the riddle of the bones once and for all.
A few of the Grey’s I believe were executed for being traitors that I do know. As far as I can remember the Earl of Rivers (Woodville) bloodline ended in 1574, but that doesn’t mean to say there weren’t any illigetimate children down the line until that point and it’s now that offspring that hold the Woodville DNA.

Anyanka said

Elizabeth had several sisters as well as several daughters so if some-one really wants to find a direct female line descendant, then there probably is at least one out there..

That’s true Anyanka, and surely Jaquetta had siblings as well, and so did Richard Woodville.
Can we be entirely certain that the coffins found in the crypt of Elizabeth and Edward 4th weren’t moved from somewhere else? it does seem that over the years coffins within the abbey have been moved all over the place, to accomodate more people?
Even Elizabeth was moved during the reign of James 6th. Originally I’m given to believe that she was buried in a magnificent tomb on her own, but when James decided to rearrange things Elizabeth was buried on top of her sister. I can only presume that this was to do with his plans to move his mother from Peterbrough to Westminter.
Peterbrough Abbey is beautiful by the way. I love the beauty of the architechra (excuse bad spelling) and of course KOA’s tomb is there too. It seems sad that such a iconic Queen should be buried in such a simple tomb and it was the Victorians that gave her such a simple tomb.
There is also a rumour that Maria de Salanas is buried with her. (Slightly off topic here but I’m a goldmine of little snippets of trivia)

Olga said

I’m just reading David Baldwin’s book on Richard of York and he has pointed out that while Thomas More said they were buried under the stairs, he also said they had been dug up afterwards and re-buried somewhere secretly. Interesting. He also confirmed the bones being found 10 feet down.

Yes indeed it is interesting Olga, and again the 10ft questionable theory (IMO) rears it head again Also one has to ask, why (if Thomas More’s account of the whole Princes disappearence are taken as sacrosanct) were the Princes dug up and moved else where? and if they were, who did it? and who ordered it? and more to the point just whose bones were they that were identified of being that of the Princes? That one we will never know of course, but it does pose another mystery to why the bones were identified as the Princes if they are not.
The only we can really solve the mystery is by DNA testing, but the Queen (silly old duffer) is not prepared to roll over and give her consent to allow this anytime soon, on this issue. So the mystery of the Princes continues.
I’m going to get this book out from the Library too.

Olga said

I’m going to read that and his Richard III bio this weekend, I have been meaning to read his stuff for ages. It’s been very good so far Bo, definitely have a read.
More said a priest of Robert Brakenbury’s dug them up and moved them. The bones were 10 foot deep at foundation level apparently. There is a note added to More’s history that Raleigh saw the bones of two children when he was imprisoned in the Tower, lying on a table.

Weird with a capital WE Olga. I must admit I’ve been a bit lax in the reading department for a few weeks, had to many things to do.
I will certainly be going to the library tommorrow though, as my brain (wherever it is) is screaming out for some book fodder, to digest.

Boleyn said There is a note added to More’s history that Raleigh saw the bones of two children when he was imprisoned in the Tower, lying on a table.

that would strike me as unlikely in the extreme – Elizabeth I went to significant effort to have the tombs of her forebears (the York tombs at Fotheringay, (Great-Great-Grandfather, Great-Great-Grandmother, and Great-Great-Uncle), Arthur, Prince of Wales (Uncle) at Worcester etc..) repaired after the damage done to them in the reformation, so it would be odd if she had allowed the bones of her Great-Uncles to be left lying around in the Tower.

there’s no evidence that i’m aware of that suggests that she made any attempt to have Richard III’s (presumably pretty wrecked) tomb at Leicester made good however, so the above isn’t evidence of an absolute commitment to family history..