Any thoughts about maltreatment of the Princes?

Hi Tony,

Welcome to the group....I haven't been a member for long either.The only information that I know about the Princes are that they were placed in the tower and disappeared from view shortly afterwards.It was noted/seems that the eldest boy,Edward,was praying a great deal because he thought he was going to die. There is however no evidence that Richard did them any harm.I am sure other members will be able to give you a lot more information.

Best wishes
Kathryn

--- In , <group_mail_address@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I am new to the group and I have been lurking as a I'm a bit in awe of you and the depth of knowledge you have...
>
>
> So I apologise if my questions are stupid, but I wondered if there is any evidence or suspicion that the Princes were maltreated in any way before their disappearance, or conversely that they were being well-looked after?
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
> Tony
>

Thanks Tony for asking about the treatment of the Princes and everyone for all their information,especially Marie and Cathy.It does make a great deal of sense.Especially the princes/boys withdrawal from the public view. Richard's replacement of their servants with his own could be seen as a triple protection both for the boys,their own servants and Richard's peace of mind.He must have thought about what to do with the boys.Edward's praying may have been a double bluff.....if it was reported that he was fearful for his life and people thought that he had died he would be removed from danger.....the same with his brother.The boys would have had to have been made aware that their co-operation was needed in order for them to be protected.If the boys were to be moved to a place of great safety and protection ie Burgundy......they would need loyal servants who were able to merge into the background to accompany them and who were unknown to the opposing factors/opposition.Hence Dr Argentine may have eventually been replaced because the boys were being moved and he was too well known and may have had health problems himself that prevented him from travelling substanial distances.The fact that he appears to have been kept on by Richard and later Henry(Elizabeth?)shows/implies he was a respected family retainer.

Kathryn
--- In , <group_mail_address@...> wrote:
>
> Wow, what wonderful replies! I am very grateful to you for taking the time and trouble to answer so quickly!
>
>
> I was not aware of the attempts on the Princes, so keeping them in the tower would actually seem the most sensible thing to have done to try and keep them safe.
>
>
> It is tempting to take the eldest suspecting he might die soon, as a "hint" towards him thinking Richard was finding them an inconvenience - But could it not have been the attempts on them that he was thinking of and fearing might result in his death instead?
>
>
> I am pleased this has not been the subject of a discussion before and I am not re-treading old ground. It is just so tantalizing to be stymied at every turn on any actual conclusive evidence one way or the other.
>
>
> I wonder if anything would show up in the Royal accounts, like the provision of money for a tutor for the Princes, or a doctor?
>
>
> From the answers, it feels to me like they were under close guard and their servants being replaced with one that were trusted by Richard (possibly because of the attempts on them) but that they were actually being looked after as well as is reasonable with that sort of security being needed.
>
>
> I wonder if there is any record of a tutor, governess or even a guard being assigned to them? As then if there was any record of them no longer being needed, then that might narrow down when they disappeared a bit.
>
>
> I wonder how it would have played out? I mean if they disappeared because an attempt on them had been successful, how would you tell the King you had blown it and they were gone? Conversely, if Richard was in some way implicated, who could he have got to do the deed and who could be trusted enough? Does anyone know of any "unusual" executions or imprisonments at the time that might be Richard punishing the guards who let them be taken, or covering his tracks if he was responsible for their disappearance?
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
> Tony
>

I have just reread Marie's reply and my thoughts that Dr Argentine may have been infirm and not able to travel are wrong.So sorry.

Kathryn


--- In , "kathryng56@..." <kathryng56@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Tony for asking about the treatment of the Princes and everyone for all their information,especially Marie and Cathy.It does make a great deal of sense.Especially the princes/boys withdrawal from the public view. Richard's replacement of their servants with his own could be seen as a triple protection both for the boys,their own servants and Richard's peace of mind.He must have thought about what to do with the boys.Edward's praying may have been a double bluff.....if it was reported that he was fearful for his life and people thought that he had died he would be removed from danger.....the same with his brother.The boys would have had to have been made aware that their co-operation was needed in order for them to be protected.If the boys were to be moved to a place of great safety and protection ie Burgundy......they would need loyal servants who were able to merge into the background to accompany them and who were unknown to the opposing factors/opposition.Hence Dr Argentine may have eventually been replaced because the boys were being moved and he was too well known and may have had health problems himself that prevented him from travelling substanial distances.The fact that he appears to have been kept on by Richard and later Henry(Elizabeth?)shows/implies he was a respected family retainer.
>
> Kathryn
> --- In , <group_mail_address@> wrote:
> >
> > Wow, what wonderful replies! I am very grateful to you for taking the time and trouble to answer so quickly!
> >
> >
> > I was not aware of the attempts on the Princes, so keeping them in the tower would actually seem the most sensible thing to have done to try and keep them safe.
> >
> >
> > It is tempting to take the eldest suspecting he might die soon, as a "hint" towards him thinking Richard was finding them an inconvenience - But could it not have been the attempts on them that he was thinking of and fearing might result in his death instead?
> >
> >
> > I am pleased this has not been the subject of a discussion before and I am not re-treading old ground. It is just so tantalizing to be stymied at every turn on any actual conclusive evidence one way or the other.
> >
> >
> > I wonder if anything would show up in the Royal accounts, like the provision of money for a tutor for the Princes, or a doctor?
> >
> >
> > From the answers, it feels to me like they were under close guard and their servants being replaced with one that were trusted by Richard (possibly because of the attempts on them) but that they were actually being looked after as well as is reasonable with that sort of security being needed.
> >
> >
> > I wonder if there is any record of a tutor, governess or even a guard being assigned to them? As then if there was any record of them no longer being needed, then that might narrow down when they disappeared a bit.
> >
> >
> > I wonder how it would have played out? I mean if they disappeared because an attempt on them had been successful, how would you tell the King you had blown it and they were gone? Conversely, if Richard was in some way implicated, who could he have got to do the deed and who could be trusted enough? Does anyone know of any "unusual" executions or imprisonments at the time that might be Richard punishing the guards who let them be taken, or covering his tracks if he was responsible for their disappearance?
> >
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> >
> > Tony
> >
>