Encyclopedia Article

The Princes in the Tower refers to Edward V of England (b. 1470) and his younger

brother Richard, Duke of York (b. 1473), the sons of King Edward IV. After Edward IV’s death

in April 1483, his twelve-year-old son Edward V was proclaimed king. However, before his

coronation could take place, his uncle Richard, Duke of Gloucester, assumed the role of Lord

Protector. Within months, Parliament declared Edward IV’s children illegitimate under the

pretext of a pre-contract of marriage, and Richard was crowned King Richard III in July 1483.

The two princes were lodged in the Tower of London and gradually disappeared from public

view. By late 1483, they were no longer seen, and their fate remains one of the most debated

mysteries in late medieval English history.

Contemporary Sources

The earliest surviving accounts of the princes’ disappearance include Dominic Mancini’s

The Usurpation of Richard III, written in 1483, and the Crowland Chronicle Continuations.

Mancini, an Italian observer present in England at the time, reported that many believed Richard

had destroyed his nephews to secure the throne.1 The Crowland Chronicle, likely written by a

well-connected cleric, expresses uncertainty but acknowledges widespread suspicion

surrounding Richard’s actions.2 These sources are near-contemporary but remain cautious and

indirect in their accusations.

2 The Crowland Chronicle Continuations, 1459–1486, trans. and ed. Nicholas Pronay and John Cox

(London: Richard III and Yorkist History Trust, 1986).

1 Dominic Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard III, trans. C. A. J. Armstrong (Gloucester: Alan Sutton,

1984).

Alexandria Pearl Carpenter

HIST 498

Professor Milliman

02/15/2026

Later Tudor narratives shaped the dominant version of events. Polydore Vergil’s Anglica

Historia, written under Henry VII’s patronage, and Thomas More’s History of King Richard III

present Richard as morally culpable and strongly imply his responsibility for the princes’

deaths.3 These works were composed after the establishment of the Tudor dynasty and reflect the

political need to legitimize Henry VII’s claim to the throne following Richard’s defeat at

Bosworth in 1485.

Legal and Political Context

Richard III’s claim to the throne rested on the parliamentary act Titulus Regius (1484),

which declared Edward IV’s marriage invalid and his children illegitimate.4 This legal maneuver

removed the princes from the line of succession and justified Richard’s accession. The existence

of this statute highlights the central role of dynastic legitimacy and parliamentary authority in the

political crisis of 1483.

Modern Scholarship

Historians such as Charles Ross and A. J. Pollard reassessed Richard’s reign within the

broader instability of the Wars of the Roses, emphasizing political context over moral narrative.5

Revisionist scholars, including Annette Carson, have questioned whether the evidence

conclusively proves Richard’s guilt.6 Recent scholarship continues to revisit the evidentiary

6 Annette Carson, Richard III: The Maligned King (Stroud: History Press, 2008).

5 Charles Ross, Richard III (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981); A. J. Pollard, Richard III and the

Princes in the Tower (Stroud: Sutton Publishing, 1991).

4 Rotuli Parliamentorum: Records of the English Parliament, vol. 6 (London, 1767–1777).

3 Polydore Vergil, Anglica Historia, trans. and ed. Denys Hay (London: Royal Historical Society, 1950);

Thomas More, The History of King Richard III, ed. Richard S. Sylvester (New Haven: Yale University

Press, 1963).

Alexandria Pearl Carpenter

HIST 498

Professor Milliman

02/15/2026

record and reassess assumptions about responsibility, reflecting the ongoing nature of historical

debate.7

The Mystery and Its Legacy

In 1674, skeletal remains were discovered in the Tower of London and later interred in

Westminster Abbey as the presumed bodies of the princes. Scientific examination in 1933 was

inconclusive, and modern proposals for renewed testing have sparked renewed public interest.8

The persistence of the mystery has contributed to Richard III’s complex historical reputation and

inspired literary, dramatic, and popular reinterpretations.

The Princes in the Tower remain emblematic of the uncertainties inherent in medieval

history. Surviving evidence is fragmented and shaped by political agendas, and historians

continue to debate responsibility, motive, and interpretation. Rather than offering definitive

answers, the case illustrates how historical narratives are constructed, challenged, and revised

over time.

8 John Ashdown-Hill, The Last Days of Richard III (Stroud: History Press, 2010).

7 Michael Hicks, “Edward V (1470–1483),” in The Encyclopedia of the Wars of the Roses, ed. John A. Wagner

(Leiden: Brill, 2014).

Alexandria Pearl Carpenter

HIST 498

Professor Milliman

02/15/2026

Bibliography

Ashdown-Hill, John. The Last Days of Richard III. Stroud: History Press, 2010.

Carson, Annette. Richard III: The Maligned King. Stroud: History Press, 2008.

The Crowland Chronicle Continuations, 1459–1486. Translated and edited by Nicholas Pronay

and John Cox. London: Richard III and Yorkist History Trust, 1986.

Hicks, Michael. “Edward V (1470–1483).” In The Encyclopedia of the Wars of the Roses, edited

by John A. Wagner. Leiden: Brill, 2014.

Mancini, Dominic. The Usurpation of Richard III. Translated by C. A. J. Armstrong. Gloucester:

Alan Sutton, 1984.

More, Thomas. The History of King Richard III. Edited by Richard S. Sylvester. New Haven:

Yale University Press, 1963.

Pollard, A. J. Richard III and the Princes in the Tower. Stroud: Sutton Publishing, 1991.

Ross, Charles. Richard III. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981.

Vergil, Polydore. Anglica Historia. Translated and edited by Denys Hay. London: Royal

Historical Society, 1950.

Rotuli Parliamentorum: Records of the English Parliament. Vol. 6. London, 1767–1777.