historians have poured scorn on these suggestions as the ages of both More and Clement simply don't compute in order for Clement to be York. The theory goes on to suggest that Edward V also survived the tower and turned himself into Sir Edward Guildford. There is little weight given to this theory by serious historians. It is all a bit too Da Vinci Code for me and is not something I would consider raising as an option in a case I was working on in the police. What the words “John, the rightful heir” actually mean are a mystery. Surely more appropriate wording might be “John, the rightful king” if the portrait was depicting Richard? One possible suggestion is that Clement was More's own bastard son. Maybe Dan Brown can answer the question with a blockbuster that is sure to outsell my own little effort.
The most interesting and mysterious of the alternative theories concerns a grave in a church in Kent. Eastwell Church near Ashford in Kent now stands in disrepair after bombing in the Second World War. However, within the church is a tomb that the records show contains a Richard Plantagenet . One possible theory until recently was that this was the final resting place of Richard III. However, we now know for certain that this isn't the grave of Richard III (he has spent many years under the car park in Leicester). So who is the Richard Plantagenet buried at Eastwell? Could it be that Richard Duke of York was taken to the country and lived a non-remarkable life, yet in death was buried under his real identity? There is little further evidence to go on other than a book written in the 18 th century called Desiderata Curiosa. The book is a written record of local stories that had been told for centuries. The book tells that Richard Plantagenet was the bastard son of Richard III. A book written centuries later based on local legend and rumour doesn't count as compelling evidence in my mind. Richard Plantagenet of Eastwell remains an interesting figure. There may just be an outside possibility that he could be Richard, Duke of York. If the bones in Westminster Abbey and those in the vault of Edward IV proved not to be the princes, I would be very keen to investigate this particular tomb.
Conclusions
The changeling theory is certainly extremely plausible. Elizabeth Woodville would have been more than capable of devising a plan to make this happen. She also had the network in place that would have helped her. However, the number of people that would have had to have been duped would mean that, in my opinion, such an attempt would have had little chance of success. Gloucester met personally with York. This meeting was probably not for a pleasant, friendly uncle and nephew chat but more to ensure that this really was his brother's son. Gloucester would not have made the mistake of underestimating Elizabeth Woodville and so wanted to be completely satisfied that he now had the second son in his control.
So, based on the fact that I don't believe the changeling theory would have worked, I suggest that we have a murder case and the victims were the two princes. On the slim chance that a changeling was one of the two boys, then the murderer certainly believed their victim to have been the Duke of York. Whichever of the two scenarios is the case, we are still dealing with murder.
CHAPTER SEVEN
Events after Richard III's coronation
We need to study events after Richard III's coronation to see if there is any evidence that comes to light regarding the fate of the boys. This is not going to be as detailed a timeline as that after Edward IV's death. This will just show key events.
Early July 1483
More writes that all the princes normal servants are dismissed and four trusted men are appointed to guard them. Two of them are named as William Slaughter and Miles Forest.
17 th July 1483
Sir Robert Brackenbury is appointed Constable of the Tower.
18 th July 1483
Royal Warrant is issued commanding payment to thirteen men for