The Princes in the Tower

(26) Alison Weir writes quite accessible and entertaining history of the English Monarchy and this is no exception. Since reading Josephine Tey's 'The Daughter of Time,' my fascination with this period has been re-ignited and in particular the desire to read more about this age-old mystery. Weir walks us through the identification of the contemporary sources and their stories of what happened from just before the death of Edward iV's to the reign of Henry the 7th. She recaps the origins of 'The War of the Roses,' succinctly and clearly. She counters the revisionists including the conclusions made by Tey's Inspector Grant.

I wish she had spent more time on the more newly discovered forensic evidence, but I guess that is not really her thing. I felt there wasn't too much that was new to me in this account and that it pretty much says - hey, this is what was put about and corroborated at the time. Regardless of the motivation of the writers, it needs to be believed. Get over it. And I kind of agree with her despite my love for the Richard in 'Sunne in Splendor' by Sharon Kay Penman. Especially with the findings of the bodies exactly where More's account said they were initially buried. Hard to refute that.

Anyway, I am not surprised that the princes were killed and it was hushed up. It doesn't seem as scandalous as its made out to be when you put it in context. All kinds of people were beheaded for the slightest infraction including women and teenagers and old ladies. . . Alison Weir does a great job with narrative history and I am always happy to read her accounts; miss the drama of fiction which is the only reason I can't give a higher rating. ( )

I hesitated between a 3 or 4 star rating on this book and settled with the three. Like others, I felt that in this case that the author went into it with the foregone conclusion that the Princes were killed by their Uncle (Richard III). Although the book was written in 1992, there have been some recent discoveries to challenge that claim and as far as I know no further updates to the book have been made. It was an easy read though and interesting but it was heavily written about why the author feels it was King Richard III and less on the discovery of the bones and forensics involved in their identification which is what I was interested in. ( )

For years, the reading public learned from Shakespeare's Richard III about the murder of 2 young princes. Ms Weir goes on a search for other sources to see what they had to say about what happened to the 2 boys. Her analysis of the documents available avoids reading between the lines. She begins with the murder of Henry VI & ends with Henry VII who discovers the truth but buries it to avoid trouble. Fortunately, she is able to compare the documents & evidence which confirms Richard III conspired to kill the 2 princes & attempted to bury the truth. In 1674, workmen who were repairing the tower discovered the 2 bodies in a chest deep in a hole. Even to this day, the author explains, there are some questions but leaves no doubts that one of the most mysterious disappearance of the 2 princes is indeed an interesting topic. ( )

Like all of Alison Weir's works, this is a historical novel pretending to be history.

And it would be nice if she hadn't made up her facts. Did Richard III arrange for the murder of the Princes in the Tower? Probably. That doesn't justify the rest of this. A good historian looks at the facts to reach a conclusion, rather than deciding what she wants and then rewriting the facts.

It's perhaps worth noting the range of ratings her books receive. That's pretty rare for genuine historians.

Usually I write longer reviews, but there isn't anything in the way of facts to review. So what is left to say? You may like Weir's style of fiction. I don't. There isn't much to say beyond that. ( )

Weir is at her best in her History titles. Really, really detailed and very compelling. Revisionists are delusional :) ( )