Neither Mancini nor the Croyland Chronicler pay as much attention to the fate of the Princes as history as done. Mancini is honest enough to admit that, despite the fact that 'twere was a suspicion that he had been done away with', (25), he has been unable to find out the fate of the young king when he writes;
‘Whether, however, he has been done away with, and by what manner of death, so far I have not at all discovered.’ (26)
Although he does not directly accuse Richard of killing or having killed the Princes, he does appear to be convinced that he had a hand in the affair. The Crowland Chronicler also gives the impression that he believes that Richard was in some way responsible for the deaths of the Princes. His version of events mirrors Mancini quite closely, except he does mention a plot to free the Princes.
Like the two source writers Seward and Hicks agree that Richard was ultimately responsible for the Princes' deaths. It is how the two writers approach their subject that is most striking. Both use different methods of analysis to arrive at a similar conclusion. Hicks deals with the episode in a matter-of-fact style and devotes little over one page out of one hundred and sixty five to it.
Seward, on the other hand, sensationalises and devotes numerous pages to it. In dealing with this
episode Seward takes more liberties with his sources and uses his imagination more than at any
other time in his book. It appears that he has to be "creative" because, as he admits, that there is
'very scant evidence'(27). This is why he appears to be more willing to make assumptions and guess
where the sources have been unable to provide an answer. A good example is the relationship between
Mancini and Dr John Argentine. Argentine was the young king's doctor and attended him whilst he was
in the Tower. Mancini mentions him once, thus;
'The physician Argentine, the last of the his attendants whose services the king enjoyed, reported that the young king, like a victim prepared for sacrifice, sought remission of his sins by daily confession and penance, because he believed that death was facing him.' (28)
The description, 'The physician Argentine' is transformed into ‘His friend, Dr Argentine.’ (29). The implication could be that Argentine was somehow giving Mancini confidential information. Seward quotes a report to the French court, at the time France was ruled by a minority king. The court was warned by their chancellor, Guillaume de Rochefort, to;
Think of his children.... being murdered with impunity and the crown passing to their assassin’.(30)
According to Seward, this chancellor may have met Mancini, who may have been in the neighbourhood. He reports that;
'it has been suggested that the Italian had told Rochefort of his fears for the boys lives'(31)
Seward has written of Mancini’s suggested fears within ten lines of using Mancini's own quote where
he had admitted that he did not know of the Princes fate. Although Seward has published Mancini’s own
words, it appears that he prefers to accept his own imaginative version of events, based on his own
conjecture.
|