Did King Richard III Really Murder His Own Nephews? | Fact Or Fiction | Timeline

In this instalment, Tony Robinson goes in search of the truth about one of Britain's most maligned monarchs, Richard III. Robinson investigates whether Richard really did murder his two nephews, the Princes in the Tower, aged nine and 12, before usurping the throne. And if he did, what were his real motives? Robinson finds that much of what has been understood about Richard as historical fact turns out to be at best mistaken, at worst completely fabricated by subsequent generations. But just as his investigation is drawing to a close, an astonishing fact emerges that leads Robinson to question far more than just the received notions about Richard III. It calls into question the whole legitimacy of the last 500 years of British royalty.
It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service, at a huge discount using the code 'TIMELINE' ---ᐳ bit.ly/3a7ambu
You can find more from us on:
/ timelinewh
/ timelinewh
This channel is part of the History Hit Network. Any queries, please contact [e-mail]

[@michaeljohnson4574]

I thought the music was going to wake richard

[@lizrickaby7329]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@ANinjasMom]

🤣🤣

[@alleynealisleem9777]

Yes Wake King Richard Up To Make Love To You! Your Batty Boy Man Lover is Waiting For You!!!🤣😠🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😱🤭

[@trudies4791]

@@alleynealisleem9777 There is something seriously wrong with you. Get help.

[@alleynealisleem9777]

@@trudies4791 what do you mean!!!

[@MultiJB1975]

The music is not loud enough! I can still hear parts of the documentary :( What's the point of releasing a music video with so much background noise ?!

[@hardygirl51]

Hahaha; I see what you are saying--reverse psychology........

[@banzaifx4679]

Lol

[@mike62mcmanus]

@@hardygirl51 Are you blond?

[@OneofInfinity.]

@@hardygirl51 🤦‍♂️

[@hardygirl51]

@@mike62mcmanus ARE YOU?? That's not the proper way to spell it either.........

[@DamoBloggs]

Would have been a good documentary - if it was n't for that idiotic background music

[@ytv31]

Morteus can't agree more, it's soo irritating!

[@lorianneiacobellis2256]

agreed

[@reh3ddoes]

Yep, the editor and producer should be fired. I lasted 2 minutes.

[@davidcartledge6620]

@@circusbrains yeah more cowbell

[@jleditzig]

Do you mean foreground music?

[@winonajohnston2539]

I AGREE WITH DAVID HENDERSON!!!!! What an educational, informative beautiful documentary that was 3/4 ruined by loud music, bird sounds, etc. drowning out Mr.Robinson!!! I was SO disappointed and aggravated!!! SHAME ON the producers on allowing this when it could have been a 5-STAR creation!!!!!!!

[@beeftec5862]

The original broadcast will have been fine sound wise. The freebie youtube video is a poor copy; you get what you pay for.

[@ncaa12cfb92]

Great grandpa get some yearning aids it’s not that bad

[@ScaleModelIncLIVE]

Your caps lock and exclaimation buttion seems to be broken, they seem to keep coming on and off at random points and getting stuck

[@frederikbjerre427]

They never learn.

[@lisalambrecht6676]

Totally agree

[@jillianaprati108]

That music is so distracting. In parts I could hardly hear the narrator.

[@bigmoniesponge]

In some parts I couldnt hear him at all!

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@signovsiv1125]

No one: Absolutely no one: Producers: let’s add some funky music so that no one can hear what he says :D

[@vilstef6988]

Many of these documentaries presented by Tony Robinson seem to suffer from miserable sound mixing.

[@sairysv8625]

The music's not bad I think... it's just that its placed as the forefront when it's the narrator who should be the most audible. 🤷‍♀️🤦‍♀️

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.😊

[@angiemcintosh5543]

I can't hear anything but the loud music.

[@kudu42]

If Richard killed Edwards sons, why did he not also kill George's son, whose claim to the throne was arguably stronger than his (Richards) - also, at the time of the alleged murder of the princes, the Constable of the Tower was Lord Stanley. No-one could have got to the boys without his knowledge. Stanley promised to fight for Richard at Bosworth, but in the event he reneged on that promise and stood off during the battle. Stanley was married to Lady Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry Tudor, later Henry 7th - what a coincidence!

[@ashleyleonard8148]

EXACTLY. I say this all the time...Lord Stanley is always sus. And honestly, I believe he was hedging his vets. 1. He thought "hey. If they die, and Richard wins, maybe he'll have one less claim off his plate? And if Henry wins, he'll thank me". He was trying to determine he'd be in power regardless, before the Battle of Bosworth.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

Perhaps cos it was also his wife’s nephew

[@lyndsaycrawford]

And what a coincidence that Edward V & prince Richard were illegitimate, as well as their father & anyone who would’ve opposed Richard was executed. A lot of convenient coincidences put Riii on the throne

[@nbenefiel]

If Richard had killed his nephews, he would have declared they died of one of the many diseases endemic to children, had Masses said for their souls and given them proper and public burials. Elizabeth Woodville’s daughters would have had every right to the crown with their brothers dead. Richard never showed anything but kindness to them and to their mother. When Bishop Stillington revealed that he had plight trothed Edward and Eleanor Butler he obviously had some kind of evidence. Richard had nothing to do with this announcement. He was not even at the meeting. Far from killing George’s son, after his own son died, Richard was planning to remove George’s attainder and make young Edward his heir. Edward was later executed by Henry VIII. Between Henry VII and Henry VIII, all of the Yorkist heirs were killed. The only two whose fates remain unknown are Edward and Richard, Edward IV sons. There is an entry in the account rolls of Margaret of Burgundy of money paid for the raising of Yorkist children (or heirs, I’ve seen both words used). Who were these children?k

[@nbenefiel]

@@lyndsaycrawford Richard had very few people executed. His worst move was forgiving Stanley and his wife, Margaret Beaufort.

[@siriuslee9615]

Isn't background music supposed to be just that ?

[@lucinaburgos2284]

Very good but the music is kind of loud.

[@larciabella]

very loud

[@karenhall4645]

Just what I was thinking!

[@racheldemain1940]

Yes, too loud.

[@shaneculkin7124]

Yes. Mixed improperly

[@GirlPowerGirlStrong]

Do the editors not realize that the music drowns out the voiceover?!?!

[@alancoe1002]

Let's put Richard in some perspective. William the Conqueror depopulated Yorkshire. John, numerous murders, including his nephew Arthur, the true heir. Edward I, numerous slaughters in Wales and Scotland. Edward III, started Hundred Years War. Richard II, arbitrarily deprived Henry, Duke of Lancaster of his inheritance, sowing the seeds of his own deposition which would lay the foundations for the Wars of the Roses. Henry V, who re-kindled the Hundred Years War, leading to slaughters of French civilians. Edward IV, who would have numerous opponents put to death for treason, without trial, people who had never sworn fealty to him, staying true to Henry VI. He also had Henry VI bludgeoned to death in the Tower, soon after the battle of Tewksbury had seen the death of Henry's only son and the capture of his Queen. Henry never abdicated, or was 'tried' in any way. Murder was unnecessary. I am not a Ricardian. He was a ruthless man, who saw the boys lives as his death, by the Woodville faction, and who would seek to atone for his sins by funding an unprecedented number of chantries to placate his God, and by attempting some reforms. But, it was not enough to keep those who believed he had killed the boys from overthrowing him. Many of his older brother Edward IV's servants would seek vengeance by means of a relatively obscure exile. So, as tyrants go, there were certainly worse. I wouldn't put Henry VII in that category, unless you include the pecuniary measures, fines, suspended sentences. He disliked shedding blood unnecessarily: witness his mercy with Lambert Simnel, and, at first, with Perkin Warbeck, and, for quite a while, with Warwick. To secure the Spanish Marriage for Prince Arthur and the succession, he 'tried' Warbeck and Warwick for conspiracy and treason and put them to death. He, too, likely felt that it may have cursed his son, in the end. But the worst thing he did was to bring Henry VIII into being. There's your tyrant. Many thousands killed just in the case of The Pilgrimage Of Grace. If Richard had been victorious at Bosworth, he likely would have been seen as a ruthless but just ruler, who had come to the throne by unfortunate means. There certainly had been (and would be) much worse.

[@NinjaGrrrl7734]

If I was wealthy, I would pay someone like you to teach me history. I'm trying to learn, at this late date, with my thick old noggin. I've learned some, enough to follow what you've said and remember most of it from other knowledge. But you have a far more ranging perspective than I do, because you know so much more. I aspire to be like you. So, for whatever it's worth, you're a teacher, a guide, and a hero to someone. Carry on!

[@mangot589]

All this is true. The problem is looking at it through modern eyes, a futile endeavor, unless you understand the medieval mind. You don’t even have to understand it, but to realize they thought completely different than we do now.

[@valaryward8452]

Lies.. Just like the white washing. If he did kill someone’s it was in self defense. Probably an intruder trying to steal his property, land or someone else.. John Ward City on a Hill or Winthrop mean friendly village, The messenger. Or Allah you pick. The grandfather of Richard Ward

[@mortalclown3812]

Dr. Coe, I presume? 🤗 Great overview of a subject I've only learned in quilt pieces... and from a certain playwright, I'll confess. Thanks for the micro lesson in Richard

[@pk6810]

I wish I could word my thoughts and conclusions as well as you. Couldn't agree more.

[@thewayofthegunn]

The vocal and music tracks are way out of balance.

[@danyelacastro1]

I’m guessing someone was having too much fun with his synthesizer? Wayyyyy to much 😂

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@TheSquad4life]

wtf I really wanted to enjoy this documentary but the loud music is overwhelming the narration, smh what an amateur production

[@stussypoo]

lol im DOP on this? ur acc peak

[@johannnespaul4300]

its just at the beginning

[@Boozakk]

I’ve always loved Tony Robinson. Shame I can’t hear him though.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@lindathomas5500]

Actually sod all to do with uploading to KZbin, it’s on their original.

[@terencemichaels]

ruined by the loud music

[@Sn0rmoms]

The sound is atrocious. It made following the documentary nearly impossible and, at times, uncomfortable.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@Eastmead]

Gave up on this as the crappy music was drowning the words. Whoever edited it ought to be made to listen to it on an endless loop!

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@hreader]

Very interesting documentary - but wish they'd KILL the stupid, intrusive music!

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@dconaway2877]

background music is NOT in the background. Drowns out narration in parts, Pretty annoying if you are interested in the topic

[@HistoryMarche]

This came just in time for my work break. Thank you!

[@kingjulien8275]

Lovely to see you here!

[@Kleinfurkon]

Throw the complete soundtrack away and you'd have the beginnings of a good documentary

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@lacouerfairy]

So I'm assuming this documentary was created before they found his bones in the parking lot?

[@bonnielong5812]

lacouerfairy yes

[@chris7921]

lacouerfairy Car Park, Dear. We are British!

[@llcoollee5075]

@@chris7921 the best part of watching that documentary of them exhumation of the bones was seeing that woman from the Richard The 3rd society’s dreams crushed when the proved he was indeed a hunch back.

[@rubbishwithisabella1455]

@@llcoollee5075 He wasn’t a hunchback, he had scoliosis. My cousin has scoliosis and it’s not medically considered to be a hunchback, you can barely see the difference between someone with scoliosis and someone with the usual placed spine.

[@slyaspie4934]

@@llcoollee5075 my god that woman was an overly dramatic, wet blanket lol I admire her passion but can you imagine working with her, you can see in that documentary everyone is constantly on eggshells incase she starts having a breakdown lol unprofessional and awkward at best

[@StephiSensei26]

Timeline always outdoes itself with food for thought! Thank you again Tony Robinson!

[@wuipuichang611]

Thanks for this. Exciting information and well done too. I coped with the music issue that so many complain of. Just turn up your volume to hear the narration. It works!! Thanks again ☺

[@idaornstein1305]

Allow me to add: I’m re-reading Josephine Tey’s wonderful book on Richard third called: “The Daughter Of Time” And there’s plenty in it which tends exonerate him from being the 2 nephews killer.

[@nbenefiel]

There is that entry in Margaret of Burgundy’s account rolls of money allocated “for the raising of Yorkist heirs”. We know what happened to the family of York after Bosworth. HenryVII killed most of them and HenryVIII wiped out the couple that remained. It was the Tudors who were murderous monsters, not Richard.

[@Ann12681]

Daughter of Time is a wonderful book, that was very popular over 50 years ago and opened up many discussions of was Richard 111 vilified by Shakespeare.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

It’s historical fiction which means she had the advantage of not having to stick to the facts & logistics when it suited the plot.

[@robincupp6087]

But it turns out he was deformed by scoliosis. When they recovered the body there it was.

[@Elisabeth0801]

Na not really 'deformed', he just had one shoulder higher than the other. Scoliosis isn't that bad

[@PomegranateStaindGrn]

Lisa Maria Wilhelmine scoliosis can be extremely severe and cause incredible deformity. I’ve seen a case where the young woman’s ribs on one side met her pelvis.

[@Elisabeth0801]

@@PomegranateStaindGrn yeah I know that I have scoliosis too but the case you described is an extreme case. And it's known that the Tudors and Shakespeare were propaganda Masters against Richard lll. So it's likely that they exaggerated too when they said that he had a hump

[@pensandshakers]

Scoliosis can be corrected and aided with braces, which they would have been capable of creating. Plus, the training of the time would have forced him to stand straight, ride, and battle. The documentary popularly known comparing a modern young man with scoliosis with Richard is deeply flawed in its conception. And one high shoulder doesn't make him a hunchback cripple. The most recent portrayal - by Benedict Cumberbatch - is extreme and likely exaggerated.

[@tevansmith]

@Felix Ray you said all this much more clearly than I was about to. Thanks.

[@gloriaswims3478]

Can't watch anymore. THe music!!!!

[@LauraGlorybelle]

The audio is so distracting! Imbalanced and unnecessary background music.

[@karencawthorn3173]

In the painting of Richard 111 he looks in pain not mean.

[@thomaswhittaker4137]

@ Karen Cawthorn He may have been in pain, his skeleton showed he had scoliosis and arthritis in his spine.

[@arwenitaofdoom9041]

The music ruins everything how can this be so badly done?

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@anniemars]

I “love” Richard III. After seeing his skeleton being found, researching and watching his reburial, I think he was badly portrayed and unfairly maligned in history.

[@perniciouspete4986]

To the extent possible so far, everything negative said about Richard III has been proven to be true.

[@jaybee1248]

@@C-eo1rt actually he didn’t try to prove it which would have looked much better on his part. He could have taken steps to prove it and investigated all available contemporary sources like the woman’s family who he claimed was pre contracted to his brother prior to Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth woodville, or requesting the papal authorities to investigate the claims made by the priest he said performed the alleged ceremony. Only making these claims after his brother’s death and the death of alleged bride who could have given testimony, removing and or executing any members of the privy council and relatives of the dowager Queen who would object, it’s pretty obvious he wasn’t looking for truth he was looking for power. I have no idea if he murdered his nephews but he did imprison them and he had charge of them when they disappeared and anyone who has studied history knows that if you don’t eliminate any threats to your rule as king, you run the risk of leaving someone for people to get behind in order to overthrow you.

[@robbiecrossing9447]

How do you come to that conclusion from seeing a skeleton??

[@Grace-tc1lq]

Annie Mars - Why? Serious question.

[@jaycee2392]

evil piggy!! 🤡

[@bobredman2057]

When I try to fairly evaluate Richard III, leaving aside the two princes, what stick in my craw are the murders of Rivers and Hastings.

[@thatswhatisaid8908]

I can understand River's, he was one of the hated Woodvilles, but Hastings... Beheaded without trial or even a priest to confess, and so publicly.

[@susanmccormick6022]

Um.That bothers me too & I am a Ricardian.Diccon did blame Edward's early death on Hastings.But Vaughn,Richard Grey & the extremely talented Anthony Rivers were only carrying out Elizabeth's orders

[@nbenefiel]

Rivers and Hastings were both tried and convicted. Richard was not present at either trial Rivers was attempting to take Richard’s position as Lord Protector and Hastings conspired with Morton, Stanley and Jane Shore to assassinate Richard.

[@nbenefiel]

@@susanmccormick6022They took their chances and lost.

[@nbenefiel]

Hastings was tried a week after his arrest. He was convicted of treason.

[@ScarletTsubasa]

Why is the music so loud? I can't hear some of what the presenter is saying because it drowns his voice out several times. Plenty of other videos you have uploaded don't have this issue. It there any way you guys could fix it?

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@irajayrosen4792]

All the background sounds & music drowns out the voice over. Annoying

[@jakshar]

Sound is bad, the music is far too loud

[@gilliangrannum1978]

Terrible sound track. Music exceedingly distracting and very strange, given the subject matter.

[@TheStephanie715]

impossible to understand......the music is annoying . The documentary, thought provoking

[@pennynorthcutt5833]

Background music is much to loud

[@kevinjamesparr552]

You did not look into this too far .Evidence is firmly set in the words of Bishop Morton. Richard was framed to set a new King on our throne . Richard was an able bodied fighter .His twisted spine did not affect his ability to swings a sword or ride a horse as he had a full stable

[@leanie5234]

@@C-eo1rt didn't his unearthed skeleton PROVE that he did indeed have scoliosis ? There is a very interesting video about a remarkable young man, named Dominic, who shares Richard's diagnosis, and who illustrates clearly that one man's debilitating condition is another man's opportunity to shine. In other words, Richard would not necessarily have been "disabled" to the extent that his affliction was obvious.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

Evidence is a word that is thrown around far too easily where this case is concerned. Most “evidence” I’ve been directed to regarding Ricardian theories are never peer reviewed or been subject to any academic scrutiny. What you’re actually saying is he didn’t look into enough to suit your narrative or some romanticised idea of Richard being set up.

[@bopbopanna]

@@leanie5234 Usain Bolt also has scoliosis. He has to adjust his stride to accommodate it.

[@Moose.-vy5ye]

Lyndsaycrawford, To what evidence do you refer?

[@nbenefiel]

Richard led the military from the age of 17.

[@davidsexton6604]

Oi ! Robinson why are you not wearing gloves when handling those historic books !

[@johnentwhistlesurelysamsun1840]

I absolutely agree with David Sexton, gloves should have been worn when handling those historical books, they of course are absolutely irrepleaceable, and with Richard Duke of Gloucesters signiture on them!!

[@rubbishwithisabella1455]

@@johnentwhistlesurelysamsun1840 In the burial of Richard III the priest (I don’t know if it was a priest, I’m just gonna say the priest) was holding a prayer book that used to be Richards’ without gloves and I was so annoyed.

[@Grace-tc1lq]

Well, he would have been following instructions. A lot of archives now won’t let you wear gloves so don’t blame him unless you know the full story.

[@ediekathan071]

Interesting story...but the loud sound effects and music are louder than the dialogue in some spots

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@halimfusianto225]

Auto generated translation help me a lot since the music background louder than Richard III.

[@alanj8577]

Thanks

[@guyfaulkes3035]

Horrible sound track mixing is becoming too common with these newly-posted docs on YT. The issues are always the same: music is TOO LOUD, the narrator's voice is too low, and other dialog goes up and down in volume, making adjustments necessary every 30 seconds. It ruins what would otherwise be a good viewing experience. Do the people who re-mix these TV docs for the Internet not know what they are doing with the audio? Are they hiring deaf people to do the work?

[@Account.for.Comment]

If you ever do music or video editing, you'll find out that exported results look and sound differently in different devices. The sound might work great in the uploader' s computer but became terrible in our product due to the different decoding protocols. And the uploader may be too lazy to reedit the audio and upload a new video, so we have what we have. Hope that explains it. The music is also terrible in my device, but I can at least hear the voices, so I focus on that. Luckily, this is not a movie.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@moon_eye]

wow the music is so loud :o

[@googloodo]

I went to a concert the other night, and a documentary broke out.

[@sasca854]

Did you guys not proof watch this before releasing it? Lol.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@KuwabaraAngel96]

So, even if Edward the Fourth was illegitimate, he still would have been King by right of Conquest. I quote from the movie "The King".... " all monarchies are illegitimate"

[@nbenefiel]

Edward IV was not illegitimate. He was born three weeks early. All of my kids were born three weeks early and they all weighed over 8 pounds. No medieval noble woman would cheat on her husband before the first son. Cecily Neville travelled with her husband constantly. They obviously had a happy marriage.According to English common law, no child born to a married woman can be illegitimate.

[@denniswild5603]

the tudors right from their graves deliberatley raised the volume of the background noise here, so nobody gets to know about the details surrounding the unsolved "death" of the two too-young-to-be-kings

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@gunsprotector2000]

good documentary. but the music makes me couldn't heard what tony was saying

[@ashatteberry2127]

I cant even watch the rest of this because the damn music is so freaking loud, its given me a migraine.

[@AlexanDrMoskalenko]

Nice try, Mr.Robinson. Everybody knows that Richard III was killed by Prince Blackadder, and some man called Baldrick was helping him to cover it up

[@shirleylane131]

😂😂😂

[@lisalking2476]

Since discovery of the children's bone couldn't they too be DNA tested???

[@frugalmama6946]

well now we know he was buried by the monastary, never dug up, and never thrown away so how much of this tale is true as well?

[@Lorriann63]

That was awesome! Happy Hogmanay to you and Teka, and Hapoy New Year too!🎉

[@evelyntorres8647]

Music too loud. Can’t hear the narrator. 🤷🏽‍♀️

[@janethagaman394]

Not only is the music too loud, so are the battle noises, the birds, and any other background noise. Sometimes all you hear is a whisper from Tony. Tony makes for excellent documentaries, too bad the sound engineer is not as good. Doesn't' anyone review a program before putting it out there? Such a shame I feel like I missed a lot. To bad the CC's aren't any good either, because that's just another way to go, if your not hearing what's being said.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@jeaniejones7431]

Music is so loud, I can’t heard the words. Why?

[@janetlemaire333]

Background music is so loud I can't hear what Tony is saying

[@charlesmynhier2652]

You need to turn the volume of that music up, I can still hear some of what is being said.

[@heatherfeather1293]

Darn it!! Wanted to watch this, but the music is so loud! Can barely hear the narrator

[@dellajoycebairdmoses7890]

The sound of music overwhelmed the speaking of the narrator. Very aggravating to say the least. 😪

[@Whistler-jx7pk]

The skeleton shows KRIII had a crooked back, scoliosis. But that does not equal a hump, it just means leaning to one side.

[@britc.3536]

And if he wore enough clothing or had it specially made, as was often the case, none would have been the wiser.

[@deanvrabl]

Omg..... Why is that music so loud?

[@tomallen6117]

Needs subtitles. That music is too loud..

[@marytudor7386]

Although this is overall a poorly produced video, i thought this was a fairly decent documentary in terms of substance until near the end when it takes a left turn and supports the notion of Edward IV’s illegitimacy. In my opinion, it is unlikely that Edward IV was illegitimate. The primary reason is that this theory hinges on one basic circumstance; Cecily Neville, Duchess of York, would have to have been unfaithful to her husband. I believe this to be unlikely for several reasons. First, although Cecily Neville and Richard Plantagenet’s marriage had been arranged when they were children, they spent much of their childhood together, and their subsequent behavior throughout their lives indicates that they loved each other, and held each other in the highest regard. Secondly, Cecily was very much aware of her lineage and royal descent; it is very unlikely that she would have betrayed her husband with anyone, let alone the “common archer” with whom she is supposed to have slept. However, if we are willing to believe this about Cecily, the next issues to be dealt with are the timing of Edward’s birth, and the nature of his subsequent christening. These are the some of the circumstances used to support such a theory. First, no one knows the moment of conception, not even the mother herself. That Richard and Cecily were not in the same place during a supposed window of time is absolutely ludicrous as the basis for this accusation. They were not separated by the Narrow Seas at the time; they were both on the Continent, and only a few miles apart. Either could easily have visited the other during the window of time when conception occurred. Secondly, Cecily and Richard had recently lost a child, their son, Henry, and were still in mourning. I can think of no less likely time to seek consolation in another’s bed, especially for a couple known to enjoy a happy marriage. Other supposed evidence put forward is based on Edward’s looks. Richard Plantagenet was short and dark, whereas Edward was tall and fair. In this day and age of precise DNA findings, I’m surprised anyone would subscribe to the theory that Edward was illegitimate based on this. Both Cecily and Richard had Plantagenet descent, and both carried the genes of ancestors known to be tall, fair giants. Two famous examples of this are King Richard I (The Lion Heart) and King Edward I (Longshanks). Also, note that in the case of Richard I’s parents, they produced an entire brood of children who were tall and fair, except for one; Eleanor’s last child, John (“Lackland”), was known to be short and dark. As far as Edward’s christening not being as elaborate as his younger brother’s, there might have been many reasons for this. But foremost in my mind is to once again take into consideration that Cecily and Richard had just lost their first son and heir, after a decade of trying to have children. I’m sure they were very glad to have Edward, but a low-key christening might have been what they wanted, just in case they lost this boy, too. The grief over little Henry’s death may still have been raw enough to make them feel this way. In addition, we know that two factors were causing a money crisis just at this time for many of the English nobles and landed gentry; poor harvests were curtailing revenues, and Richard’s financial woes were compounded by the fact that he was not being paid his salary at the time, later one of his many grievances against Henry VI and his government. The couple simply may not have been able to afford a showy christening ceremony just at that time. Next, we must take into consideration the timing and the motives of those making the accusation. It seems very convenient to me that these rumors were started concurrent with Warwick and George’s attempts to usurp the throne. This issue of Edward’s legitimacy was raised again when Edward’s other brother, Richard, sought to take the throne in place of Edward’s son. There are also some statements in various chronicles that Cecily herself said Edward was illegitimate, when she was angry about Edward’s secret marriage to Elizabeth Woodville. But none of these are eyewitness accounts, and were written decades after the events. In other words, they are based on hearsay, and qualify as little more than gossip. Finally, the fact that Richard himself recognized the child as his own is very telling. If he had any doubts, he would not have accepted him as his heir. We will never know the truth, but for all these reasons, I believe it to be highly unlikely that King Edward IV was anything other than the rightful king of England. © Bonny G Smith

[@sekotingitana6797]

Well said! Bravo!

[@susanmccormick6022]

Complete sense & I totally agree.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

Well said. I wish I had more time to get into this. It’s ridiculous to try & claim to know when someone exact conception date over 500yrs ago. They can’t even do it now! That parchment, from the annals of a cathedral in Rouen, only proves that ppl were in a church praying when Edward IV would’ve been conceived (it’s so ridiculous) Cecily was never far from her husband. She followed him everywhere his work took him. While she was at their residence in Rouen the Duke was laying siege to Pontoise & the distance between Rouen and Pontoise is 93.05km (59 miles). Furthermore in medieval times the two towns were linked by an old Roman road known as the Chaussée Jules César. Edwards illegitimacy was only mentioned when it was advantageous first to George then Richard. I work in historical research & I’ve seen a copy of Cecily Neville’s will & she states, among other things: “….mother of Edward iiii, king of England, grandmother of Edward V king of England….” She mentions being Richards mother but not as the king of England. Now we can’t ask her why she wrote that but I think it’s pretty telling but, unfortunately like most of history, we can only speculate & make the best of all the documentation, contemporary accounts, letters, warrants, wills, pardons, book keeping, clergy records etc etc It was actually the oldest trick in the book to secure power, or murder any opposition. I mean we’re talking about medieval Plantagenets here. Too many people add presentism & romanticize the war of the roses

[@lyndsaycrawford]

Sorry I know I’ve already wrote loads but speculation about Edward iv’s baptism is also ridiculous. It could’ve been for reasons no ones ever considered. I also believed they maybe rushed it through due to losing a baby before Edward & didn’t want to take any chances. Ppl need to remember, Christianity isn’t what it is now, they were God fearing ppl & really did believe babies wouldn’t get into heaven if they weren’t baptized. For me this would be the most logical reason.

[@stevenrey56]

Loved the content. Use of background music had me going "Huh?" a bunch of times.

[@mykellygirl55316]

Background music is way too loud!!

[@MsDjessa]

I don't think the bad things Richard did can be excused by pointing to the time he lived. As no doubt future people could do the same for us. How ever I think the lesson is most people aren't either completely good or bad. Richard being a great example of that. And I do mean great.

[@Moose.-vy5ye]

Msdjessa, Bad things? Such as what? Before you go on about his nephews, be aware that there is zero evidence that Richard did anything of the sort. In fact, if they were killed at all, it was more likely that Buckingham or Margaret Beaufort did it.

[@nbenefiel]

@@Moose.-vy5yeI think Richard sent the boys to his sister in Burgundy after Henry Tudor’s first attempt to invade England. I think Edward died from the abscess in his jaw and that young Richard emerged as Perkin Warbeck.

[@nbenefiel]

There’s no evidence that Richard did “bad things”. He was considered, at the time, to be a progressive and benevolent king.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

I think Richard iii is a fantastic example of being a man of his time. & no one is simply good or bad! We just need to be aware that life was far more brutal back then & the peerage were the most vulnerable. Especially , with the war of the roses still happening, power was fleeting Firstly, I believe Edward iv made a grave mistake giving Rivers guardianship & naming Richard lord protector, Edward V hardly knew his uncle Richard & would’ve definitely formed a bond with the men raising him ( Rivers & Vaughan) Edward iv should’ve had Richard raise him. With the civil war still looming, when Edward iv died, I believe Richard knew there was a power vacuum & he had to get custody of the young king cos if he didn’t he would’ve probably been executed or exiled himself as he would always be viewed as a threat by the Woodville faction. And they did have great influence over the young king & held a lot of powerful positions. (A bit of nepotism would’ve probably served Edward iv better tbh) I believe Richard underestimated just how much influence & how close he’d became with his guardians. I also believe he misread the nobles who were extremely loyal to Edward iv & expected nothing more than to crown his eldest son & heir. No one would’ve wanted another civil war. Imo Riii ended up with no other choice & he seemed to exhaust every avenue before turning to having them killed , imo, I do believe it came down to him or them & Machiavelli would say that was acting in self defence. He was in very real danger if he did nothing so it’s like politicking but one wrong move & you’re dead. In medieval times it was possible to be a decent king , celebrated war hero, brilliant guy n still get rid of claimants to the throne. Especially when they’re likely to inspire rebellion. That’s why I think he was a man of his time because it was dog eat dog & ppl had to do things & make decisions we couldn’t comprehend never mind relate too.

[@TheMarksman316]

Funny thing was, Baldrick (Tony Robinson) picked up Richard III's head after Blackadder killed his grand uncle. lol

[@jmtubbs1639]

unwatchable due to sound levels and music interference.

[@thelittlerenegade2631]

Am I crazy or does this documentary completely skip over the fact that Edward the fourth named Richard the Lord Protector? That’s kind of an important fact?

[@Bob.martens]

Aah, Timeline: home of the botched audio docs.

[@jerithblackstone9327]

I don't know the thought process behind adding the music to the video. The music is horribly annoying and WAY too loud. I really hope you didn't pay someone to ruin the video because that's exactly what the music did.

[@leanie9660]

Seems more like a defective tv stereo. The television in my bedroom does this as well. On one documentary, the seagulls were so loud that the dialogue was unintelligible. This was due to a disconnected speaker inside the cabinet. Easy fix.

[@coopsevy5664]

2018!! TODAY 2020 AND THIS BACKGROUND MUSIC STILL HASN'T BEEN TAKEN AND EDITED. Please change this.

[@stephaniejane306]

Interesting documentary. Of course some facts are have now been proven to be true. Richard did have a severe form of scolosis. However through all the layers of the time, it could hardly been seen. I think the people who knew of it that were still at court in the Tudor times drastically overplayed the "hunchback". We now know that he was buried in what is now a carpack in Leicestershire. I'm glad at least this documentary mention Henry Tudors mother had a motive. However, why has no one mention Richards wife Anne. She was Queen, the king makers daughter and had a lot of power. Perhaps she has a lot more to do with this than we might think. She could easily have access to the Tower or order someone to kill the boys. Plus since Richard had always been loyal why the quick change of character? The playing nice and then completely changing after a little time leaving the room? Could someone been quietly manipulating him behind the scenes like Anne? I guess we will never know. Also Henry Tudors claim is through his mother not his father. His mother's line was legitimize by the pope so he did have a proper claim. The "spoiling" of the line by Elizabeth of York would not really matter. Besides the current royal family's claim is based on Sophia of Hanover so it wouldn't really matter. Plus just because Richard Duke of York was like the documentary said not there at the proper "time" does not mean Edward was not conceived later and born early but happened to survive. Perhaps not all documentation survived from the Cathedral. We just don't know. Anyway good documentary overall. The music and scene sound was way too high and could hardly hear the narrator.

[@hayleyjames7893]

My feeling is that Buckingham had the boys murdered it is highly possible he hated the Woodvilles since he was fond of idea that someone of his rank had been forced to marry a lowly Woodville. After the Hastings execution Buckingham was in charge of Morton a staunch Lancastrian supporter. Buckingham was constable of England and would most probably had access to the tower. After having a falling out with Richard, who was on royal progress, he went to his estates in Brecon and released Morton who went to Henry Tudors Mother.

[@idontgiveafaboutyou]

What would Anne have to gain from their murder? Plus, she may have been the Kingmakers daughter and was extremely wealthy, which made her powerful, but she didn’t seem to hold any political influence and probably didn’t want too. Plus she wasn’t that manipulative or scheming as people make out to be.

[@phyllisruthmick5391]

You know I don't even know where to begin! There are so many things that I disagree with! But mainly you are trying to imply that others had a motive to kill those two little boys and that is outrageous! Others at the time barely had extremely vague motives at best! It was Richard Plantagenet Duke of Gloucester who was behind the disappearance and murders of the two boys. It does not matter if he had a servant kill them and none of the other facts surrounding this really matter that much either. Richard killed them, had them killed, whatever, and that is absolutely unconscionable. Whatever good he may have done, whatever rights he may have had, have been blackened by his actions towards those two boys. Simple as that!!! This may be the internet but one should still have good and careful grammar although I have seen a lot worse.

[@renshiwu305]

@@phyllisruthmick5391 Those accusing Richard of murdering his own nephews should explain what reasons Richard had for murdering them. They should also explain the dramatic change exhibited by Richard: from his brother's right-hand man to the plotting tyrant intent on dispossessing King Edward IV's heirs, if that is indeed the case. What motives would Richard have for murdering his own nephews? He was already king, Parliament had acceded to it. Even if he claimed that they had died in captivity, as was done with Richard II and Henry VI, it would have suggested that he was a murderer. Moreover, their disappearance (and neither Richard III nor Henry VII ever made a statement about the fate of the two princes) would make it seem like Richard was insecure about his own legitimacy and security on the throne. Richard had his other nephew (the Duke of Clarence's son) and his nieces (Edward IV's daughters) under his wardship, and they were perfectly safe and comfortable. As the video says, it was customary for the incoming monarch to reside at the Tower prior to their coronation. Young Richard was probably there as well to keep the two of them secure from plots (and there seems to have been an assault on the Tower). Both the Duke of Buckingham and Lord Stanley held the office of Lord Constable, in which position, they had authority over the operations of the Tower. Buckingham's motives for murdering the princes are obscure, but, then, so is Buckingham's career. He was outside the coterie of power during Edward's reign, despite his rank and marriage to the queen's sister. He was given great authority and wealth by Richard, but he nonetheless revolted against Richard's rule and cast his lot with Henry Tudor. He was also a descendant of Edward III, like all the contenders for the throne during the Wars of the Roses. Lord Stanley was of course married to Henry Tudor's mother, and being the step-father of the king is better than being a mere servant of the king. Stanley was a turncoat with regularity, switching sides and pledging loyalty to the winner of the battle after the fact. Buckingham and Stanley both had opportunity to kill or "disappear" the princes, they both had close affiliation with the throne, and they both acted as traitors. Their characters and motives single them out as more likely culprits in the disappearance of the two princes compared to Richard.

[@sabrinadupont2017]

@@idontgiveafaboutyou true

[@hyliadreamer]

You've done a fascinating man a terrible disservice through your audio editing. The incidental music is far too loud for me to properly hear the narration. Moving on to some other video now.

[@emilykosoff6577]

The background music needs to be turned down alot

[@suzannesund4595]

I can’t watch this until they fix the music . . . It’s dreadful !!!

[@chachadodds5860]

Fascinating. I'd never heard about the French archives, on Edward's birth. Although, the researcher here, portrays Edward as the 1st son, and Richard, as the 2nd, when Edmund, was the second son. Curious faux pas. As others have pointed out, too bad the background soundtrack, became the prominent soundtrack, drowning out the narrator.

[@leanie5234]

You forgot about George, Duke of Clarence....

[@lyndsaycrawford]

Richard is technically their 4th son.

[@lyndsaycrawford]

There are no french archives in Edward IV’s birth. There’s a parchment in the annals of a cathedral in Rouen of people who were in the cathedral praying & cecily’s name is listed. So for some crazy reason this is being passed off as evidence that Cecily was praying round about the time Edward should’ve been conceived. She could’ve did both in one night. Not that we even have the means to find out exactly when a child was conceived now, never mind over 500yrs ago. Like all Ricardian theories, it’s been bent & shaped to suit & justify Richards terrible actions. As usual it’s a desperate stretch!

[@nbenefiel]

There’s no evidence of Richard’s “terrible actions” He had no reason to kill his nephews. If he had, he would have done what EdwardIV did with HenryVI, presented their bodies to the public, have a doctor say they died from natural causes and buried them with due pomp and circumstance. Having them just vanish did more harm than good. Richard was not stupid when he erred, it was through kindness Ike sparing Stanley and Morton, which cost him his life and his reputation.

[@Victoria-xs6fw]

Music too loud!! Couldn't hear Tony

[@harrietallen2040]

I love Tony Robinson. I think there should be a Tony Robinson appreciation club.

[@susanmccormick6022]

My boss worked for him for a time.

[@morrigan908]

While I understand the frustration over the horrible music, I suspect the sound balance was altered to avoid a copyright strike. Would have been much better if they'd just played with the aspect ratio a bit the way most folks do.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@ecklecticgal7009]

Even the crows are louder than the speakers!

[@christinestill5002]

Too bad, can't hear him especially over the music, Tony & the Beefeater at the Tower. Dreadful.

[@kevinjohnbetts]

I think the audio is one side of a stereo image or just the front of a surround sound mix. Tony Robinson's voice is more than loud enough at some points and dreadfully quiet at others. The original television show was fine so blame the provider not the sound engineer. :)

[@guyfaulkes3035]

It might've been an original 5.1 channel mix, where music occupied 4 channels (the corners) and Tony's voice just the 1 center channel, so he got buried by the music in the mix-down to stereo. I wonder if KZbin streams their multichannel videos in surround-sound for 5.1 systems? Maybe it's the 2-channel audio circuitry in stereo PC setups that ruins the mix? Whatever the case, somebody has dropped the ball at Timeline.

[@ibidthefrog]

I wonder if they added a track to get round some copyright issues

[@camt9967]

@@ibidthefrog Ah, interesting. Never occurred to me that that could be the case. Don't know anything about sound mixing, only know the this was too loud. Thanks for the suggestion.

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@wendychavez5348]

I'm glad I read the comments about the sound quality first--I was actually prepared to listen carefully. Other than that, a lot of great information!

[@murraywebster1228]

The problem is the KZbin audio processing algorithms, not the original production.

[@TMMS-13]

Great video but some of the music is louder than the talking

[@SyriusStarMultimedia]

This music was added as a means to stop me from hearing Tony.

[@toria2489]

Looked like a brilliant documentary sounded bloody awful. Couldn’t hear anything over that music!!

[@thenoworriesnomad]

Great vide but the background music was a bit loud in place especially when Tony Robinson was talking...

[@shirleylane131]

Love Tony Robinson, a brilliant story teller .

[@jimmydonohue4504]

great facts and content, but the music has got to go or get much softer!

[@alinaalina796]

The music is soooo loud. Couldn’t hear a thing

[@earballgrooves4928]

I still watched till the end but ur narration was barely audible under the music just fyi. Had to use captions to follow. 💛🖤💛

[@Thesaeed23]

He now had a Tomb at Leicester Cathedral Thanks to Phillipa Langley et al! :)

[@lisakaz35]

Do we even know for sure they were murdered?

[@britc.3536]

Apologies for the REALLY late reply, but I think as far as any historian knows, Edward and Richard went into the Tower in 1483 and never came out.

[@nbenefiel]

@@britc.3536I think Richard sent the boys to his sister , Margaret of Burgundy. There was an entry, in her account rolls, of money allocated for the raising of Yorkist heirs. There were only two heirs of the House of York unaccounted for.

[@BallymurphyBabe]

Is this a music video or documentary 😡 I bloody hate music in documentaries!!

[@Nana-vi4rd]

What's wrong with the sound? Can barely hear Tony yet the music is loud.

[@chrisnelmes7180]

Interesting subject,but all I can hear is the Damm music !!

[@SaxJockey]

I would not credit that as music.