|
The Princes in the Tower | 
 enlarge | Author: Alison Weir
Publisher: Ballantine Books
Category: Book
List Price: $14.95
Buy Used: $2.99
You Save: $11.96 (80%)
New (28) Used (53) Collectible (3) from $2.99
Rating:  97 reviews
Sales Rank: 56996
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 304
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.6
Dimensions (in): 8.3 x 5.5 x 0.8
ISBN: 0345391780
Dewey Decimal Number: 942.044092
EAN: 9780345391780
ASIN: 0345391780
Publication Date: July 10, 1995
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
"A SURPRISINGLY FRESH AND TREMENDOUSLY THOROUGH CONTRIBUTION to the debate...Weir's book is, no doubt, not the last on this subject, but it might be the best....[She] constructs a devastating case...[and] brilliantly illuminates the nature of late-medieval political power."
--The Boston Globe
Despite five centuries of investigation by historians, the sinister deaths of the boy king Edward V and his younger brother Richard, Duke of York, remain two of the most fascinating murder mysteries in English history. Did Richard III really kill "the Princes in the Tower," as is commonly believed, or was the murderer someone else entirely? Carefully examining every shred of contemporary evidence as well as dozens of modern accounts, English historian Alison Weir reconstructs the entire chain of events leading to the double murder. We are witnesses to the rivalry, ambition, intrigue, and struggle for power that culminated in the imprisonment of the prince and the hushed-up murders that secured Richard's claim to the throne as Richard III. A masterpiece of historical research and a riveting story of conspiracy and deception, The Princes in the Tower at last provides a solution to this age-old puzzle.
"Weir takes on this delicious mystery with a fearsome vengeance. The result is a fascinating and completely credible account."
--Milwaukee Journal
"Did Richard III do in his nephews or didn't he? How much of the evil-uncle legend was later Tudor propaganda and how much was true?...This is exciting reading."
--The Denver Post
"A fascinating historical whodunit in which truth is more sordid than fiction."
--Kirkus Reviews
A MAIN SELECTION OF
THE BOOK-OF-THE-MONTH CLUB
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 92 more reviews...
 It worked for me... December 8, 2008
Clear, concise, and extremely readable, Weir's The Princes in the Tower clips along at a very agreeable pace, yet it seems some are eager to pan this book based on its conclusions. There are two options: either Richard III usurped the throne and murdered his nephews or he didn't. Weir is forthrightly in the tyrant camp as her conclusions drawn from source materials reflect. These are the same source materials used by those who champion Richard's innocence. Good books can emanate from either viewpoint, if one avoids the glowering pedant.
In evaluating Weir's conclusions, reviewers here should note that a contemporary source is any source able to cite witnesses during their lifetime. It matters not that Sir Thomas More was 8 years old when the murders took place. It's the age of the witnesses that matter. Furthermore, if we dismiss the narrative of the *subsequent* regime for fear it is too negative, we must dismiss the narrative of the *subject* regime for fear it is too positive. Key to extracting probabilities from both is discretion.
In a very brief 258 pages, I thought Weir did a tolerable job of evaluating events and presenting a considered analysis. But, more importantly, she's authored an entertaining book. I haven't always been so generous with Weir. Her Eleanor of Aquitaine I found too agenda-driven, the type of history that merely assuages the author's present-day sensibilities. Not so, The Princes in the Tower. It is a straightforward narrative history, a centuries-old "whodunit", which I eagerly ripped right through. 4+ stars.
 Weir provides a watertight case of the guilt of Richard III August 26, 2008
1 out of 4 found this review helpful
In this painstaking work of meticulous historical research Alison Weir thoroughly uncovers the facts behind one of English history's greatest murder mysteries.
Weir reconstructs the entire chain of events leading to the murders of the young princes, the 13 year old Edward V, and his brother the ten year old Richard, Duke of York.
She thoroughly disproves the claims of those whom she calls the 'revisionist' historians, those who favour Richard III and aim to exonerate him of the murders and to portray him as something of a saint.
Richard III, as Duke of Gloucester, had supported his older brother Edward IV loyally during the later stages of the War of Roses.
During Edward's reign he proved himself to be courageous in battle, charming and remarkably capable as well as ruthless.
On the sudden death of his brother in 1483, he became Protector of the kingdom, and guardian of his young nephew, Edward V. He speedily arrested and executed the relatives and supporters of the boy's mother Queen Elizabeth Wydville, and induced her to hand over her younger son, the little Duke of York, who was lodged in the Tower with his brother. In June Richard assumed the crown and the tow boys were never seen again.
Weir reveals why Richard's brother the Duke of Buckingham could not have murdered the princes alone, for several reasons. He, Buckingham, was not in the right place at the right time and had no authority to gain access to them. If the obstacles had been somehow overcome, Richard III would have speedily found out about it, and accused Buckingham of the murders but Richard never did so even after Buckingham was tried for treason, and it would have been politically advantageous to label Buckingham as the murderer, thus diverting suspicion against King Richard himself.
The author gathers all the facts recorded in the surviving contemporary sources and points out how beyond this, there is a vast amount of compelling circumstantial evidence that substantiates the known and leaves no room for any alternative theories.
Most of the facts were recorded by Sir Thomas More. The convenient deaths of the princes, so soon after Richard III's accession seems too fortuitous and too coincidental.
It would have been to Richard's advantage had he not ordered their deaths, to present them alive had they in fact been son, or to produce their bodies for a decent burial but he did no such thing.
Richard III never made a statement disclaiming all responsibility for the deaths of the princes, and offering a plausible explanation. for their disappearance.
Furthermore she records the discovery 300 years later of two bodies in the tower who showed marks of having been murdered who could only have been the princes.
The play by Shakespeare, Richard III - Criterion Collection was based on the Chronicles of Raphael Holinshed, which was based on the works of Edward Hall, which was taken almost word for word from Thomas More's history.
Between the More and Shakespeare, more was done by nay other writers to publicize Richard III's evil reputation. More's history is a moral tale about tyranny.
Shakespeare's play is a study of evil.
Weir's deeply researched and meticulously shows that More's history of Richard III was not far off the mark.
Sad July 17, 2008
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
It sure won't answer the centuries old question of the demise of Edward IV's boys, but surely will sway you in the direction of one culprit...Detailed, and well researched, albeit somewhat biased, it gives a perfect picture of the era, prevailing conditions, backrounds etc etc..If you like history, you'll enjoy this. Bottomline though, whoever the guilty party may be, two young kids were murdered horridly by some power hungry monster..My heart goes to the kids...Sad...
The Princes in the Tower recounts the murders of King Edward V and his brother the Duke of York in the Tower of London July 15, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
Alison Weir has written countless popular histories about medieval and Tudor England. In this 1992 book she explores the murders of King Edward V who was 12 and his younger brother the Duke of York who was 10 years old. The saying from Sir Walter Scott goes, "What a tangled web we weave when first we plan to deceive!" How true this maxim is in the complicated spider's web of conspiracy, usurpations and dark plotting which occurred in fifteenth century England!
When the Lancasterian King of England Edward IV died in 1483 his throne was assumed by Edward V his son by Elizabeth Wydville. She and her children would be forced to take sanctuary in Westminster after the seizure of the throne by the wily and intelligent plotter Gloucester. (Richard III).Richard III was one of the many brothers of the late King. Weir asserts that Richard had the boys in the tower murdered! He did so to sweep away any threats to his throne. Richard even wanted to marry the lads sister the fetchingly beautiful Elizabeth of York. This marriage did not occur due to the scandal over the foul deed done in the Tower of London. Many of his contemporaries believed that Richard was the man responsible for the murder. Later it was Sir Thomas More and Shakespeare who linked Richard to the foul deed. Despite historical revisionism the author believes that this is the correct view of what happened.
It would be Henry VII who would wed Elizabeth of York. As a Lancasterian marrying a Yorkist he ended the rivalry between the families preventing a renewal of the War of the Roses. Henry was the first of the Tudor monarchs who continued to reign in Great Britain until the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603. Henry defeated and killed Richard at Bosworth Field on August 22, 1485 to become king. His strong mother Margaret of Beaufort was overjoyed. Henry was a strong leader who was a good king. Henry later defeated rebellions led against him by imposters who claimed to be the Duke of York. Such claims were bogus!
Weir notes that the supposed bodies of Edward V and the Duke of York were discovered in the Tower of London during the reign of Charles II. This finding is disputed. Her assertion that Richard III is the man responsible for the murders is also a bone of contention.
As a neophyte to the controversy I believe Alison Weir makes a plausible case for the culprit being Richard III. This book has convinced me to read more iin this fascinating topic.
Case against Richard III Laid out Clearly January 6, 2008
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
Alison Weir's thorough research is evident in every chapter. She first summarizes the events and the dispute between the Houses of York and Lancaster. Then using obscure documents and letters, she develops a detailed timeline of events following Edward IV's death. She adds to it her historian's sensibility. There is no doubt in her mind, that Richard III was directly responsible for the Princes' deaths. I must read other opinions as well, but her case is convincing.
The only challenge to the book was that she assumes the reader knows the York and Lancaster followers well. I had to go back many times to figure out players' allegience.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
