Princes in the tower on PBS

[question everything]

This evening but check local listings

https://azpbs.org/2022/05/lucy-worsley-investigates/

I recently read a book, a mystery, about a group in Britain with a mission to prove that Richard III did not commit all the crimes attributed to him.

[Lars39]

1. The Murders of Richard III, Elizabeth Peters?

[question everything]

2. Yes. Was well written and I was fascinated to learn new historical facts

Next will be Josephine Tey on the same subject

[Lars39]

3. She made things come alive, didn't she.

[Siwsan]

4. From my studies, Richard was an ambitious, devious man who lost to someone more ambitious

Well, several 'someones' - Henry Tudor and his mother Margaret Beaufort, for starters. The whole Tudor dynasty was a lead up to the final, most glorious member, Elizabeth I. IMHO, of course.

My absolute favorite period of history.

[Trueblue1968]

6. RICHARD WAS NOT ANY MORE DEVIOUS THAN HIS BROTHERS, GRANDFATHER OR GREAT GRANDFATHER

And he certainly was not as devious as Henry VII or Henry VIII.
The adjective "devious" that you used is a ridiculous word to describe Richard III and not the other rulers.
I have read and studied English /// GB history for over 50 years.

I think Buckingham or Margaret Beaufort had something to do with the missing/dead princes in the tower.

[Siwsan]

7. Richard and Henry were BOTH devious and brilliant. One had to be to survive in that 'circle'

Sorry I left it out - please don't take offense. I ran out of space in the subject line!! And I admit that my Welsh blood does make me fall fully on the side of the Red Rose. Rhys ap Thomas, the man credited with killing King Richard and my family share what looks to be an identical family crest so I like to think we might be from the same line. The crest was discovered by a cousin, years ago, when he researched the family tree.

As for Richard, I don't know - he benefitted from the disappearance of the princes. I know he has been painted unfairly in many ways.

And the War of the Roses was, again IMHO, a battle between two families with pretty much equal rights to the throne.

And I don't know that Henry VIII was devious as much as he was totally ruthless. Especially later in life when the heir panic really set in. And then the rotting leg didn't help things.

Mary I was purely fanatical, on the religious front. I'm not sure there was anything beneficial that came out of her reign.

I think Elizabeth, despite her obvious flaws, was the most stable of the bunch.

[VarryOn]

5. Just set my dvr to record! Thanks for letting us know.

I love British history.