A mere 531 years after last being seen, the Princes in the Tower are still missing. To an inquiring mind like mine, this shows two obvious things: Firstly, mainstream historians are brainwashed poo-poo heads; and secondly, everyone has been looking in the wrong place. These is no evidence to implicate any person in c15th England and no evidence of the Princes in either England or Europe because – obviously – they were taken by forces from outside Europe to a place of hiding further afield. Once you open your mind to this awesome possibility, a hitherto unconsidered but utterly plausible line of reasoning leads you to an answer which has the power to turn our understanding of history literally upside down.
Let us start by asking who had the maritime technology to undertake trans-oceanic voyages before Columbus. The field narrows down to three – the Polynesians, the Vikings and the Chinese. We can discount the Vikings on chronological grounds and the Polynesians for geographical reasons (their clothing would not have enabled them to survive in Northern European waters), which leaves the Chinese. Gavin Menzies, in his revolutionary books “1421: The Year China Discovered the World” and “1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance”, has established beyond reasonable doubt the presence of large fleets of Chinese junks in European waters.
To those who would argue that the presence of Chinese junks in the Thames would have caused some comment, I would counter that nobody in Italy saw the fleet researched by Menzies and commented on that either, so clearly either Chinese fleets excited no comment or were such a common sight nobody thought fit to write about them at all.
So, a Chinese fleet could have made it to the Tower of London and away again without leaving a trace in contemporary records. But could Chinese sailors have got into the heavily-guarded Tower and carried off the princes without being spotted? This is asking us to suspend disbelief to an unreasonable extent; it is more likely that the Chinese had stopped off in Australia on the way and acquired the services of some dingoes, who could have easily managed the abduction without rousing the guards’ suspicions. This fact gives us the obvious lead as to where to find the princes in their later years, among the mixed-race populations among the Aborigines before Australia was allegedly ‘discovered’. As wikipedia puts it:
“Reports of unusually light-skinned Aborigines in the area by later British settlers have been suggested as evidence that the two men might have been adopted into a local Aboriginal clan. Some amongst the Amangu people of the mainland have a blood group specific to Leyden, in Holland.” (see McConnell, 1963; wikipedia 2014 )
Light-skinned the princes most certainly were; as for a Leyden-related blood-group, let us not forget that the boys’ maternal grandmother was Jacquetta of Luxembourg, which is close enough and also begins with a L.
For more details, see my forthcoming book “1483: The Year a Heavily Camouflaged Chinese Fleet Sailed up the Thames Estuary via Australia, Collaborated with Dingoes and Rescued the Princes in the Tower Before Returning to Australia and Establishing them as Duke Edward of Gidgeribong and Earl Richard of Ringarooma”.
The alternative is to believe that Richard III murdered the princes himself. Which do you choose?
McConnell, R. B. (May 1963). “Associations and linkage in human genetics”. The American Journal of Medicine 34 (5): 692–701;
Gavin Menzies op cit
Bridget Riley op art
Little Richard op bopaloobopalopbamboom
Jeff de Cuisine is married to a blue nylon rucksack and lives in a bedsit, where he is currently researching the effects of an all-pizza diet.