Latest news with #historicalmystery
The Independent
25-05-2025
- The Independent
The Princes in the Tower: Has Richard III historian finally solved the 500-year-old mystery?
A historian claims to have proof that the Princes in the Tower of London were not murdered by their uncle Richard III. Most historians believe Richard killed his nephews in the summer of 1483 after their father, Edward IV, died unexpectedly, despite a lack of hard evidence linking him to the murders. The boys, Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, were 12 and nine respectively when their father died. They were taken one by one to the Tower of London in expectation of Edward V's coronation, but never emerged. Philippa Langley, the historian and screenwriter who played a key role in uncovering Richard III's remains in a Leicester car park, has spent the last ten years investigating the case. Ms Langley teamed up with professional cold case investigators, some of whom work with the police on unsolved murder to join her Missing Princes Project. Uncovering a treasure trove of never-before-seen documents and letters she believes she has built a strong enough case for the boys' survival from the Tower of London. The conventional narrative has always been Richard III's loyal servant, Sir James Tyrell, was the boys' killer, after a confession, obtained under torture, before his execution for treason in 1502. Ms Langley argues that for it to have been worthwhile for Richard to kill the princes, he had to display their bodies, 'otherwise he did it for no reason', putting himself in jeopardy. Following the death of King Richard at the battle of Bosworth on 22 August 1485, Henry VII became King but Ms Langley said the Princes rose again and challenged him for the throne. She said: 'But Henry attempted to cast the Yorkist Princes as impostors by giving them false names and reverse-engineering their stories: Edward V became a 10 year-old boy called 'Lambert Simnel', the son of a joiner, tailor, barber, baker, organ-maker or shoemaker, and Richard, Duke of York became 'Perkin Warbeck' the son of a French boatman.' The documents she uncovered include letters supporting a rebellion by 'Edward IV's son' in 1487, the year of Simnel's uprising - which ended in him being crowned in Ireland. They also found fresh references to a boy said to be 'a son of King Edward'. On Richard, three items signed with his seal have emerged in Europe, as well as letters allegedly written by him to James IV of Scotland and even a document from the Pope. A biography of his life as an escaped prince also emerged but the author remains a mystery. Simnel and Warbeck ultimately confessed to being impostors, but Ms Langley and her team of researchers insist these were false confessions extracted by Henry VII to discredit the challengers. Asked by The Times if this amounted to proof, she said: 'Had we supplied this amount of evidence in this book to say Richard III had murdered the Princes in the Tower, would you be asking me that question?' 'I would say that they now have to prove that Richard III murdered the Princes in the Tower.' Officially, the princes' remains were found in 1674, when workmen at the Tower dug up a wooden box containing two skeletons. Four years later, the bones were placed in an urn and interred in Westminster Abbey on the orders of King Charles II. The suspects Richard III The prime suspect, escorted Edward V to the Tower of London where he was last seen. Motive – insecure hold on the Monarchy due to the way he obtained the crown, faced rebellions from the Yorkists loyal to Edward IV prior to Parliament conforming his title to the throne in January 1484. Evidence – circumstantial. Ms Langley argues that it would have better served Richard III to display the dead bodies in public to prevent pretenders to the throne coming forward. Henry VII (Henry Tudor) Richard III's rival who defeated his forces at the Battle of Bosworth. Motive – executed rival claimants to the throne following his coronation. Evidence – Henry Tudor was out of the country at the time of the princes' disappearance and so could only have murdered them post-accession. Historians have called the theory the only plausible alternative to Richard III's being the killer. Henry Stafford 2nd Duke of Buckingham, kingmaker and breaker: played a major role in the rise and fall of Richard III. Motive – held a claim to the throne through the House of Beaufort family. Evidence – a manuscript found in the early 1980s in the College of Arms collection states that the princes were murdered 'be [by] the vise' of the Duke of Buckingham. There is some argument over whether 'vise' means 'advice' or 'devise'. Sir James Tyrell English knight, loyal servant to Richard III. Motive – following the orders of his King. Evidence – said to have confessed under torture to the murder of the princes before his execution for treason in 1502, according to Sir Thomas More's The History of King Richard III. The original document containing his confession was never produced. Shakespeare portrayed Tyrell as the murderer in his play Richard III.
The Independent
23-05-2025
- The Independent
The Princes in the Tower: Has Richard III historian solved 500 year old murder mystery?
A historian claims to have proof that the Princes in the Tower of London were not murdered by their uncle Richard III. Most historians believe Richard killed his nephews in the summer of 1483 after their father, Edward IV, died unexpectedly, despite a lack of hard evidence linking him to the murders. The boys, Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, were 12 and nine respectively when their father died. They were taken one by one to the Tower of London in expectation of Edward V's coronation, but never emerged. Philippa Langley, the historian and screenwriter who played a key role in uncovering Richard III's remains in a Leicester car park, has spent the last ten years investigating the case. Ms Langley teamed up with professional cold case investigators, some of whom work with the police on unsolved murder to join her Missing Princes Project. Uncovering a treasure trove of never-before-seen documents and letters she believes she has built a strong enough case for the boys' survival from the Tower of London. The conventional narrative has always been Richard III's loyal servant, Sir James Tyrell, was the boys' killer, after a confession, obtained under torture, before his execution for treason in 1502. Ms Langley argues that for it to have been worthwhile for Richard to kill the princes, he had to display their bodies, 'otherwise he did it for no reason', putting himself in jeopardy. Following the death of King Richard at the battle of Bosworth on 22 August 1485, Henry VII became King but Ms Langley said the Princes rose again and challenged him for the throne. She said: 'But Henry attempted to cast the Yorkist Princes as impostors by giving them false names and reverse-engineering their stories: Edward V became a 10 year-old boy called 'Lambert Simnel', the son of a joiner, tailor, barber, baker, organ-maker or shoemaker, and Richard, Duke of York became 'Perkin Warbeck' the son of a French boatman.' The documents she uncovered include letters supporting a rebellion by 'Edward IV's son' in 1487, the year of Simnel's uprising - which ended in him being crowned in Ireland. They also found fresh references to a boy said to be 'a son of King Edward'. On Richard, three items signed with his seal have emerged in Europe, as well as letters allegedly written by him to James IV of Scotland and even a document from the Pope. A biography of his life as an escaped prince also emerged but the author remains a mystery. Simnel and Warbeck ultimately confessed to being impostors, but Ms Langley and her team of researchers insist these were false confessions extracted by Henry VII to discredit the challengers. Asked by The Times if this amounted to proof, she said: 'Had we supplied this amount of evidence in this book to say Richard III had murdered the Princes in the Tower, would you be asking me that question?' 'I would say that they now have to prove that Richard III murdered the Princes in the Tower.' Officially, the princes' remains were found in 1674, when workmen at the Tower dug up a wooden box containing two skeletons. Four years later, the bones were placed in an urn and interred in Westminster Abbey on the orders of King Charles II. The suspects Richard III The prime suspect, escorted Edward V to the Tower of London where he was last seen. Motive – insecure hold on the Monarchy due to the way he obtained the crown, faced rebellions from the Yorkists loyal to Edward IV prior to Parliament conforming his title to the throne in January 1484. Evidence – circumstantial. Ms Langley argues that it would have better served Richard III to display the dead bodies in public to prevent pretenders to the throne coming forward. Henry VII (Henry Tudor) Richard III's rival who defeated his forces at the Battle of Bosworth. Motive – executed rival claimants to the throne following his coronation. Evidence – Henry Tudor was out of the country at the time of the princes' disappearance and so could only have murdered them post-accession. Historians have called the theory the only plausible alternative to Richard III's being the killer. Henry Stafford 2nd Duke of Buckingham, kingmaker and breaker: played a major role in the rise and fall of Richard III. Motive – held a claim to the throne through the House of Beaufort family. Evidence – a manuscript found in the early 1980s in the College of Arms collection states that the princes were murdered 'be [by] the vise' of the Duke of Buckingham. There is some argument over whether 'vise' means 'advice' or 'devise'. Sir James Tyrell English knight, loyal servant to Richard III. Motive – following the orders of his King. Evidence – said to have confessed under torture to the murder of the princes before his execution for treason in 1502, according to Sir Thomas More's The History of King Richard III. The original document containing his confession was never produced. Shakespeare portrayed Tyrell as the murderer in his play Richard III.
Daily Mail
07-05-2025
- Daily Mail
Mystery of bloodied and bruised 'lost German girl' following Nazi surrender sparks host of wild theories
For years, ever since footage appeared in TV documentaries and online, the identity and fate of the so-called 'Lost German Girl' has proved captivating. Dressed in a nondescript dark uniform, she had a swollen face from a possible savage beating, the woman was seen walking on a road in liberated Czechoslovakia, which was split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1993. The date was May 7, 1945, the same day that Nazi Germany surrendered to the Allies after the suicide of Adolf Hitler in his Berlin bunker. As captured German troops fled in the opposite direction of Russian soldiers, the U.S. Army was at hand to witness the chaos. The footage featuring the woman was shot by U.S. Army captain Oren W Haglund on a road towards Pilsen, around 50 miles from Prague. Lost German Girl, also known as LGG, inspired works of art, poems, guitar compositions, and even an entire blog dedicated to tracking her down. But even almost 20 years on from the first attempt by Internet sleuths to find her, the identity and fate of the featured woman remained a mystery. Some claimed she was as described by Captain Haglund in the footage's original short cards an 'SS girl'. Others said she was an innocent victim of the wave of mass rape that advancing Russian troops inflicted on hundreds of thousands of women. However, no definitive proof of either her identity or what happened to her had ever emerged. Captain Haglund's clip, 25 minutes of which could be found on the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's website, started by showing captured Germans, including fresh-faced teenagers, as they milled around while being guarded by American troops. Some ate, while others sat on the grass in the rural area. Later, the film showed locals cheering and waving white handkerchiefs before more German troops were seen, marching under guard. When the recording took a darker turn, there were scenes of dead and gravely wounded Germans strewn around. What exactly happened to them remained unclear, but the scenes of death and grave injury were not the reason Captain Haglund's clip took the Internet by storm. Just over 17 minutes into the clip, Haglund's camera settled on the 'Lost German Girl' as she swept her matted hair to the side to reveal more of her swollen black eye. Grouped: The woman's shown again sat with a group of male captives, holding what appears to be a cloth in her hands and she half-smiled as she spoke, despite her battered appearance It's known that 'Lost German Girl' had been with Germany's fleeing troops but her nondescript uniform did not give any hint of what role, if any, she had in the military. There's also no evidence to back up Captain Haglund's description of her as an 'SS girl'. She could have once been a medic, or even an aide. In the footage, she stared into he camera with one hand in her pocket and the other resting across her chest. In almost drunken fashion, she stepped forward, still staring intently, and clasps her hand to her swollen eye then tilts her head down, which caused her hair to flop over her face. The footage then cut again to focus just on her face. She was then seen holding what appeared to be a deck of cards, and appeared emotional like she was going to cry as the camera remained on her. As if embarrassed, she moved her head down towards her clasped hands. The camera then panned down to show the woman's pants and suspenders, which hung around her waist. Around 40 seconds later, after the footage cut to show a bloodied, half-naked man in a blanket laying on the ground, the woman appeared again. She was sat amongst a group of male captives, and she held what looked like a cloth. Despite her battered appearance, she offered a half-smile as she spoke to one of the men. That's the last we see of the 'Lost German Girl'. Captain Haglund remained in Germany until the end of the war in Europe. He was discharged in December 1945 and became a TV production manager. He died in 1972, aged 66, and he's not known to have commented on or even discussed the 'Lost German Girl' any further. Some people who saw the footage claimed the woman was named either Lara or Lore Bauer and born in 1921. She was said to have been a helper for the German air force, the Luftwaffe. Photos of a woman said to be Bauer looked similar to the woman in Captain Haglund's video, but there were no known documents to back up the theory that it was her. German man Carlos Xander spent almost two years documenting his attempts to find the identity of 'Lost German Girl' on his blog of the same name. He recounted how the first attempt to trace her in the Internet era was in 2006. Xander then expanded on the theory that Bauer was the Lost German Girl. Bauer was allegedly born in Austria in 1921 and was said to have survived the war and gone on to work for U.S. airline Pan Am, retiring in 1985 and passing away in 1994. The blogger pointed out that there were no records of the described Lore or Lara Bauer in German or Austrian archives. Xander also recounted a 2013 post from a man who claimed that the Lost German Girl was his grandmother and she was called Mathilde. Sleuths also traced the road that the woman was filmed walking down - between Pilsen and Rokycany - and they returned to the site to take photos and videos.
