To ‘solve’ the disappearance of the princes there has to be one crucial item. Evidence. This latest ‘revelation’ provides none so Matt is correct, it’s interesting nothing more. I’m surprised at Tracy Borman quite frankly. And Matt? You were treated quite disrespectfully by Lion, poor show on their part 😕
Nobody has solved the Missing Princes mystery. Nobody is about to either but I think Philippa presented much compelling evidence last year which brought us closer. However, it still left many unanswered questions. Now new evidence has come out on the other side. Or has it.. The will of Margaret Capell isn't new and I doubt the contents are unknown. It has been around and noted since 1826. Maybe the ref to a chain belonging to Edward V is new or maybe it was overlooked as nobody gave it any credence. Any mention of something belonging to Edward V is remarkable but is it a huge ckue in a murder case? Is there even a murder case? No. There's a missing persons case of some 540 years. The collar or chain apparently found its way into the extended family of Sir James Tyrell and now Dr Tracy Borman makes it a damning find which proved Tyrell received the collar because of his connections to the alleged murder of Edward V and Richard Duke of York on the orders of Richard iii.
Great, the case is solved or we are closer to it, aren't we?
No.
Does the collar belong to Edward V? We don't know.
Did it belong to James Tyrell? No, it belonged to William Capell who left it to his widow, Margaret, who left it to her son, Giles in her will, 1516_ proved 1522. It's a legal and accessible document proven through a legal or Court process. That doesn't necessarily mean you went to Court but it was registered and probably sworn to. Similar to probate.
This will is some document, its 11 pages long. My parents wills are 1 page, mostly tick boxed.
Wouldn't you be in trouble if you had jewellery belonging to a murdered King?
How did the family get it and when and from whom? All unanswered questions. I would love to know more but I suspect it came as collateral for a loan as this was the business William Capell was in. I imagine it came with a story, that story became family history and it was valuable as such. While murder can't be ruled out, there's no proof of the killing of young Edward or Richard and you wouldn't put this in your will if you got it by illegal means.
The mention of this chain is interesting, these documents are fascinating. The documentary was poorly done, it had good bits, but it sensationalized a find which was without great importance. The significance given to it was amusing.
Borman’s constantly over-the-top assertions that this new “evidence” was “damning” was bloody awful. This kind of tabloid history does the subject a grave disservice. To some extent it comes across as almost “fake news”. I realise this sort of programme is an “entertainment”, but it sacrifices too much real information and, more importantly, misrepresents the basis of real historical research.
I know these documentaries are done to entertain rather than teach or inform, people film six hours stuff and get 2 seconds to say everything in the final cut, the filmmakers can be influential etc, but this was Tracy Borman's documentary as presenter in essence. It could have been a lot better. It could have been better balanced the the Shakespeare is history really did spoil it. Every historian has had kittens on screen over what they think is an exciting or new find. I don't know any who have done that with one which wasn't new and one which told us nothing at all. You really do need more context, more research and to question things. This wasn't a badly shot documentary, it was a bad documentary full stop.
To ‘solve’ the disappearance of the princes there has to be one crucial item. Evidence. This latest ‘revelation’ provides none so Matt is correct, it’s interesting nothing more. I’m surprised at Tracy Borman quite frankly. And Matt? You were treated quite disrespectfully by Lion, poor show on their part 😕
I’ve always found it somewhat suspicious that Thomas More, as a youth, trained with Bishop John Morton.
Poppycock!
Nobody has solved the Missing Princes mystery. Nobody is about to either but I think Philippa presented much compelling evidence last year which brought us closer. However, it still left many unanswered questions. Now new evidence has come out on the other side. Or has it.. The will of Margaret Capell isn't new and I doubt the contents are unknown. It has been around and noted since 1826. Maybe the ref to a chain belonging to Edward V is new or maybe it was overlooked as nobody gave it any credence. Any mention of something belonging to Edward V is remarkable but is it a huge ckue in a murder case? Is there even a murder case? No. There's a missing persons case of some 540 years. The collar or chain apparently found its way into the extended family of Sir James Tyrell and now Dr Tracy Borman makes it a damning find which proved Tyrell received the collar because of his connections to the alleged murder of Edward V and Richard Duke of York on the orders of Richard iii.
Great, the case is solved or we are closer to it, aren't we?
No.
Does the collar belong to Edward V? We don't know.
Did it belong to James Tyrell? No, it belonged to William Capell who left it to his widow, Margaret, who left it to her son, Giles in her will, 1516_ proved 1522. It's a legal and accessible document proven through a legal or Court process. That doesn't necessarily mean you went to Court but it was registered and probably sworn to. Similar to probate.
This will is some document, its 11 pages long. My parents wills are 1 page, mostly tick boxed.
Wouldn't you be in trouble if you had jewellery belonging to a murdered King?
How did the family get it and when and from whom? All unanswered questions. I would love to know more but I suspect it came as collateral for a loan as this was the business William Capell was in. I imagine it came with a story, that story became family history and it was valuable as such. While murder can't be ruled out, there's no proof of the killing of young Edward or Richard and you wouldn't put this in your will if you got it by illegal means.
The mention of this chain is interesting, these documents are fascinating. The documentary was poorly done, it had good bits, but it sensationalized a find which was without great importance. The significance given to it was amusing.
Borman’s constantly over-the-top assertions that this new “evidence” was “damning” was bloody awful. This kind of tabloid history does the subject a grave disservice. To some extent it comes across as almost “fake news”. I realise this sort of programme is an “entertainment”, but it sacrifices too much real information and, more importantly, misrepresents the basis of real historical research.
I know these documentaries are done to entertain rather than teach or inform, people film six hours stuff and get 2 seconds to say everything in the final cut, the filmmakers can be influential etc, but this was Tracy Borman's documentary as presenter in essence. It could have been a lot better. It could have been better balanced the the Shakespeare is history really did spoil it. Every historian has had kittens on screen over what they think is an exciting or new find. I don't know any who have done that with one which wasn't new and one which told us nothing at all. You really do need more context, more research and to question things. This wasn't a badly shot documentary, it was a bad documentary full stop.