Richard III and the Princes in the Tower

It is one of the great mysteries of English history. Did Richard III, the last of the Plantagenets, really murder the Princes in the Tower as his Tudor successors, including their greatest propagandist, William Shakespeare, always alleged? Was he the cold and calculated killer that his enemies depicted him as, who even went as far as to suggest that he poisoned his wife and brother too? This ruthless depiction of Richard Plantagenet suggested that he was thirsty for power and would eliminate any obstacles in his way. Yet prior to the princes' disappearance, he was seen as a religiously devout man, loyal to his kingdom and his people. So why was he given the blame? In a game of political intrigue, with each house (Lancaster, York and Tudor) fighting against each other, the loser of a battle would be slandered in history – as the winners would record their own versions of historical events.
There are several theories that speculate to the disappearance of the princes, including strangulation, poisoning and even her being smuggled away. With so many contradictions how can we fully determine who, if in fact anyone, killed the princes? But we know one thing for certain, with Tudor’s triumph at The Battle of Bosworth in 1485 he commissioned several writers (including Thomas More) to pen memoirs of Richard III and his definitive murder of the princes. Yet he did not know for certain if they were dead (or so he claimed), when a rebellion issued by the pretender Perkin Warbeck (1490) argued he was Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York. With the emergence of Perkin, some began to question the Tudor’s assertion that Richard III his predecessor killed the princes.
New theories began to develop suggesting that whilst Edward had been killed in the tower, his younger brother Richard had been smuggled to Flanders. Instead another boy was put in his place, so that one day Elizabeth Woodville’s son Richard could claim his stolen throne. With this knowledge, Perkin's claimant to the throne was extremely regarded. However upon duress, he allegedly confessed that he was born to a man called John Osbeck and Katherine de Faro of Flemish descent. Which brings us back to our initial argument; did Richard III kill the princes? If Henry VII momentarily believed Perkin Warbeck’s succession to the English throne, then surely he had no hand in their death. This points to only one other predominant suspect -Richard III.
The story of the princes' demise began after the death of Edward IV of England on the 9 April 1483. At the time Edward's son, the new King Edward V, was at Ludlow, and the dead king's brother, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, was at Middleham in Yorkshire. It is reported that he then went to York Minster to publicly "pledge his loyalty to his new king". The Croyland Chronicle states that, before his death, Edward IV designated his brother Richard as Lord Protector although there is no documentation of the King's actual wishes.  With this wish, Richard should have protected his nephews as future rulers of England; yet he claimed the throne for himself. Both princes were subsequently declared illegitimate by Parliament and this was confirmed in 1484 by an Act of Parliament known as Titulus Regius. The act stated that Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville's marriage was invalid because of Edward's pre-contract of marriage with Lady Eleanor Butler. The Duke of Gloucester was crowned King Richard III of England on 3 July.
The declaration of the boys' illegitimacy has been described by Rosemary Horrox as an ex post facto justification for Richard's accession. By 1893, the princes had disappeared from the tower under Richard’s care and even today we do not know whether they were murdered or died of natural causes. Many historians believe they were murdered, some suggesting that the act may have happened towards the end of the summer, 1483. Maurice Keen argues that the rebellion against Richard in 1483 initially "aimed to rescue Edward V and his brother from the tower before it was too late", but that, when the Duke of Buckingham became involved, it shifted to support of Henry Tudor because "Buckingham almost certainly knew that the princes were dead.
Other than their disappearance, there is no direct evidence that the princes were murdered, and "no reliable, well-informed, independent or impartial sources" for the associated events. Nevertheless, following their disappearance, rumours quickly spread that they had been murdered. Only one contemporary narrative account of the boys' time in the tower exists: that of Dominic Mancini. Mancini's account was not discovered until 1934 and accounts written after the accession of Henry Tudor are often claimed to be biased or influenced by Tudor propaganda.
Four unidentified bodies have been found which are possibly connected with the events of this period: two at the Tower of London and two in Saint George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. Those found in the tower were buried within Westminster Abbey, although neither set of remains has been subjected to DNA analysis to positively identify them as the remains of the princes. Due to the wishes of the Church of England and the monarchy, a plea for testing to begin has been repealed. We may never know who killed the Princes in the Tower but it has become increasingly clear that Richard III might not be the culprit…

Nefertari, Goddess of the people

She was the Queen who received paramount rewards in the afterlife; a magnificent tomb (QV66 in the Valley of the Queens) to record her greatest achievements. The decorations in her tomb are considered the most beautiful of the entire necropolis and even today visitors are astounded by the sheer craftsmanship dedicated to her resting place. Images adorn the walls; she is the Goddess Isis, the chief wife of Ramesses II, a leader among men. Stories attest to her intelligence, her skills with the people and her excellent command of languages. In fact it was even reputed that she could speak seven languages including Hittite! Yet this much loved Queen was an enigma. What we know of her existence is plagued by inaccuracy and guesswork, creating a patchwork of misconceptions. We do not know when she was born, the exact date of her death or even facts about her personal life. With so few facts, how can historians create a true picture of this revered Queen? But here is what we do know.
In the 19^th Dynasty New Kingdom, Egyptian Queen Consorts often held many titles that attested to personality traits, status and heritage. For example Nefertari held the following titles: Great of Praises (wrt-hzwt),Sweet of Love (bnrt-mrwt)Lady of Grace (nbt-im3t),Great King’s Wife (hmt-niswt-wrt),Great King’s Wife, his beloved (hmt-niswt-wrt meryt.f),Lady of The Two Lands (nbt-t3wy),Lady of all Lands (hnwt-t3w-nbw),Wife of the Strong Bull (hmt-k3-nxt),God’s Wife (hmt-ntr)and Mistress of Upper and Lower Egypt (hnwt-Shm’w-mhw). As the King's Principal Wife she was also accorded special symbols and dress and allowed to wear the Royal Vulture Crown .  The Royal Vulture Crown consisted of a falcon feather headdress with its wings spreadround her head in the act of protection. This crown associated her with the goddess Nekhbet of Upper Egypt and emphasized the queen's maternal role. On top of the Royal Vulture headdress she wears a Shuti crown (meaning the Two Feathers) as a symbol of divine law, consisting of two, tall ostrich or falcon feathers combined with a sun disk. With her many titles and supreme authority, no one could dare question her identity. Yet at the start of her role as Queen Consort, she was allegedly condemned as a ‘Heretic Queen’, with some historians such as Michelle Moran attesting to her identity as Nefertiti’s niece, the wife of   Akhenaten ( the Heretic King). If this is true then we can only imagine the hardships she must have faced to overcome the divides of a stratified Egypt. Yet with cunning, intelligence and compassion she eroded the prejudices against her and was determined to replenish the old Gods of Egypt once again, so that her name could not be used in conjunction with her heretical family. One of the ways that she was reported to have done this is through her adoption of the title of "God's Wife of Amun" in addition to the title of "King's Principal Wife". The title directly associated her with the powerful god Amun. The title of "God's Wife of Amun" referred to the myth of the divine birth of the kings of Egypt, in which his mother was impregnated by the god Amun and reflected the powerful concept of 'Divine Queenship'. An important religious office, it proved her position as the highest ranking priestess in the cult of Amen at Thebes. The title was first held early in the 18^th dynasty by Queen Ahmose-Nefertari early in the 18^th dynasty, and traditionally was held by the mothers, wives and sisters of the reigning pharaoh. It might have been that Nefertari was given this title to consolidate the power of the Ramesside dynasty in Thebes, as this dynasty of kings came from the north and Ramesses II had built his new capital at Pi-Ramesses in the Delta. To all those whom had doubted her Queenship or birthright.To, it was clear that she meant business. In the face of adversity, she implemented measures to win over the people and gradually she began doing just that . Remarkably, despite her premature death, she was only the second Queen to be deified ( after Queen Tye) in Ancient Egypt. Deification was incredibly rare, as only Pharaoh’s were made Gods. What started as a possible political alliance grew into a truly amorous relationship. No other Queen adorns Egypt so vastly as she does. Through paintings, statues, writings and love letters from Ramesses, he truly adored his young Queen. He must have been devastated at her early demise and despite his harem of women and other chief wives (he lived until the age of 96); Nefertari was regarded above all others.