It is one of the most dramatic and controversial tales in British history – how two young princes (King Edward V, 12, and Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, 9) were murdered by their dastardly uncle so he could claim the throne for himself.
But now a leading historian has uncovered evidence which he claims blows a major hole in the story of the princes in the Tower that has done so much to darken Richard III’s reputation for generations.
Dr John Ashdown-Hill, who received an MBE for his work in helping to locate Richard’s body beneath a Leicester car park in 2012, claims tests done on remains believed to be the princes – known as the ‘bones in the urn’ – show they are unlikely to have any genetic link to the Plantagenet king.
How Richard III’s skull may prove he DIDN’T kill princes: Mystery of the missing teeth could clear king of murder in the Tower
He is commonly believed to have murdered twins Edward and Richard
But a leading historian claims twins may not have genetic link to Richard III
The former king does not share same dental genetic anomaly of the twins
Dr John Ashdown-Hill therefore believes they may not have been related
By Olga Craig for The Mail on Sunday
24 July 2016
Innocent: New evidence blows a major hole in the story of Richard III and the princes in the Tower
It is one of the most dramatic and controversial tales in British history – how two young princes were murdered by their dastardly uncle so he could claim the throne for himself.
But now a leading historian has uncovered evidence which he claims blows a major hole in the story of the princes in the Tower that has done so much to darken Richard III’s reputation for generations.
Dr John Ashdown-Hill, who received an MBE for his work in helping to locate Richard’s body beneath a Leicester car park in 2012, claims tests done on remains believed to be the princes – known as the ‘bones in the urn’ – show they are unlikely to have any genetic link to the Plantagenet king.
In a new edition of his book, Eleanor, The Secret Queen: The Woman Who Put Richard III On The Throne, he says an existing dental study of the bones, discovered at the Tower of London in 1674, show evidence of hypodontia, or congenitally missing teeth.
In contrast, an X-ray of Richard’s skull has revealed he does not share this genetic anomaly – meaning they are unlikely to have been related.
Dr Ashdown-Hill, honorary senior history lecturer at Essex University, said: ‘It’s my belief the bones exhumed from the Tower of London, long believed to be Richard III’s nephews, Edward and Richard, are more likely to be Anglo Saxon remains.
‘It strongly suggests the bones have no blood relationship to King Richard. And if that is the case, it would put paid to the centuries-old belief that Richard killed his nephews. It is exciting that finding Richard could be instrumental in helping solve another of the most intriguing historical mysteries.’
Evidence: Richard III’s skull shows no sign of hypodontia, or congenitally missing teeth, meaning he has no genetic link to the bones discovered at the Tower by workmen in 1674
Dr Ashdown-Hill is now calling for the bones to be disinterred from Westminster Abbey and undergo DNA tests to reveal definitively whether they are the remains of the young brothers.
Richard, the last of the Plantagenet monarchs, died at the Battle of Bosworth Field in August 1485 after being defeated by Henry Tudor, who became King Henry VII, in the final War of the Roses.
His naked body was paraded through the streets of Leicester before being buried in a crude grave at Greyfriars – now the site of the council car park.
Richard, though an important historical figure, is remembered chiefly for the accusations that he murdered his nephews King Edward V, 12, and Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, nine. The boys were the sons of Edward IV, Richard's brother.
However, Richard – then Duke of Gloucester – had them ensconced in the Tower, claiming it was in preparation for the coronation.
Instead, he claimed the throne for himself, and the boys were never seen again.
Paul Delaroche (1797-1856), The Princes in the Tower, 1830
Throughout the centuries, historians have believed he murdered them to secure his own tenuous grasp on the throne.
The Church of England has repeatedly refused to allow forensic tests on the ‘bones in the urn’ for fear that it might lead to multiple Royal disinterments.
But Dr Ashdown-Hill said: ‘I know the Queen is very reluctant to have any Royal remains disinterred and I understand her feelings. But I believe we should make an exception and solve this conundrum.’
Read more: Richard III’s missing teeth in skull may prove he DIDN’T kill Tower of London princes | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
But now a leading historian has uncovered evidence which he claims blows a major hole in the story of the princes in the Tower that has done so much to darken Richard III’s reputation for generations.
Dr John Ashdown-Hill, who received an MBE for his work in helping to locate Richard’s body beneath a Leicester car park in 2012, claims tests done on remains believed to be the princes – known as the ‘bones in the urn’ – show they are unlikely to have any genetic link to the Plantagenet king.
How Richard III’s skull may prove he DIDN’T kill princes: Mystery of the missing teeth could clear king of murder in the Tower
He is commonly believed to have murdered twins Edward and Richard
But a leading historian claims twins may not have genetic link to Richard III
The former king does not share same dental genetic anomaly of the twins
Dr John Ashdown-Hill therefore believes they may not have been related
By Olga Craig for The Mail on Sunday
24 July 2016
Innocent: New evidence blows a major hole in the story of Richard III and the princes in the Tower
It is one of the most dramatic and controversial tales in British history – how two young princes were murdered by their dastardly uncle so he could claim the throne for himself.
But now a leading historian has uncovered evidence which he claims blows a major hole in the story of the princes in the Tower that has done so much to darken Richard III’s reputation for generations.
Dr John Ashdown-Hill, who received an MBE for his work in helping to locate Richard’s body beneath a Leicester car park in 2012, claims tests done on remains believed to be the princes – known as the ‘bones in the urn’ – show they are unlikely to have any genetic link to the Plantagenet king.
In a new edition of his book, Eleanor, The Secret Queen: The Woman Who Put Richard III On The Throne, he says an existing dental study of the bones, discovered at the Tower of London in 1674, show evidence of hypodontia, or congenitally missing teeth.
In contrast, an X-ray of Richard’s skull has revealed he does not share this genetic anomaly – meaning they are unlikely to have been related.
Dr Ashdown-Hill, honorary senior history lecturer at Essex University, said: ‘It’s my belief the bones exhumed from the Tower of London, long believed to be Richard III’s nephews, Edward and Richard, are more likely to be Anglo Saxon remains.
‘It strongly suggests the bones have no blood relationship to King Richard. And if that is the case, it would put paid to the centuries-old belief that Richard killed his nephews. It is exciting that finding Richard could be instrumental in helping solve another of the most intriguing historical mysteries.’
Evidence: Richard III’s skull shows no sign of hypodontia, or congenitally missing teeth, meaning he has no genetic link to the bones discovered at the Tower by workmen in 1674
Dr Ashdown-Hill is now calling for the bones to be disinterred from Westminster Abbey and undergo DNA tests to reveal definitively whether they are the remains of the young brothers.
Richard, the last of the Plantagenet monarchs, died at the Battle of Bosworth Field in August 1485 after being defeated by Henry Tudor, who became King Henry VII, in the final War of the Roses.
His naked body was paraded through the streets of Leicester before being buried in a crude grave at Greyfriars – now the site of the council car park.
Richard, though an important historical figure, is remembered chiefly for the accusations that he murdered his nephews King Edward V, 12, and Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, nine. The boys were the sons of Edward IV, Richard's brother.
However, Richard – then Duke of Gloucester – had them ensconced in the Tower, claiming it was in preparation for the coronation.
Instead, he claimed the throne for himself, and the boys were never seen again.
Paul Delaroche (1797-1856), The Princes in the Tower, 1830
Throughout the centuries, historians have believed he murdered them to secure his own tenuous grasp on the throne.
The Church of England has repeatedly refused to allow forensic tests on the ‘bones in the urn’ for fear that it might lead to multiple Royal disinterments.
But Dr Ashdown-Hill said: ‘I know the Queen is very reluctant to have any Royal remains disinterred and I understand her feelings. But I believe we should make an exception and solve this conundrum.’
Read more: Richard III’s missing teeth in skull may prove he DIDN’T kill Tower of London princes | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Last edited:
