The Tragic Tale of Edward V

 

Edward V was, of course, one of the tragic “Princes In The Tower”, the victim, alongside his brother Richard, of his unscrupulous uncle, Richard III. Dominic Mancini describes Edward as a young lad who was wiser than his years. Edward had the countenance quite befitting of a king; sombre yet he retained a charm that, in the words of Mancini, he “never wearied the eyes of beholders (those who looked upon him). This then was a 12 year old boy who, despite his tender age, looked very regal.

Edward was a gifted child and excelled at the first class education that would be afforded to a prince who was heir to the throne no less. He had a particular aptitude for literature which made him a gifted and articulate speaker. The portrait that Mancini paints with his words of this lost king is of a boy who was bright, engaging and wise, all qualities one would hope for in a king.

Even during the increasingly dark days inside the Tower of London, after his uncle’s terrible coup, young Edward demonstrated a level of maturity other prisoners much older than he would scarcely have been able to retain. There were no tantrums or meltdowns, which he would have been quite entitled to have; no, instead, Edward maintained his dignity, perhaps for the sake of his younger brother, likely his courage was strengthened by his faith. All the same, it was a terrible predicament for a young boy to find himself in; his father was dead, he was separated from his mother and, as time passed, it would have become clear to Edward, who likely would have been alive and well aware of his uncle’s coronation, that the future was bleak for he and his brother.

Excuses have been made for Richard III over the centuries. To this day, people maintain there is no evidence that Edward V and his brother were murdered and they could have survived. These theories are bordering on crackpot. The only theory that comes close to certainty is that Edward V and his younger brother were put to death inside the walls of the Tower and, assuming this is correct, there is only one man who could have been responsible.

There are those who struggle to come to terms with Richard III being a murderer but he wouldn’t have been the first in English history to kill a family member in the sake of his own thirst for power. In the 10th century, Elfrida, queen of King Edgar, had her stepson killed so her biological son, Aethelred, could become king and Henry I is often accused of having his brother, William II, killed during a hunt so he could take the crown. There was precedence and Richard having, apparently, been a loyal brother to Edward IV, Edward’s father, is no proof of innocence either.

But this post was not supposed to be about Richard III. My distaste for him should be apparent. This post was written for Edward V. A young king lost to us who could have altered the course of English history for the better. Edward would likely have grown to be an astute and accomplished king, more mature than his rather sloppy father. His death would, in 2 short years, usher in a changing of the guard as Richard III paid for his sins with his defeat and death at Bosworth at the hands of Henry Tudor. England now had a new dynasty that would prove to be nothing short of oddball, a stark contrast to what Edward V would have been.