Rating: 
Summary: Not her best work
Review: I've read a bunch of Weir's other works and I've liked them all, but after having read this I began doubting her other works. Having read nearly a dozen accounts of Richard III's life and his relationship to the princes, I can say that this is more or less a rehashing of Sir Thomas More's UNFINISHED biography of RIII. Her whole case rests on the work of More, whose work has been questioned, most notbably and effectively by Horace Walpole.
Weir questions her own sources and then uses them to prove her point the "Richard did it". An earthshattering conclusion? Not by any means, but the way she gets there is somewhat lazy and ignores some pretty decent scholarship on the subject. Most of what we "know" about RIII comes from Shakespeare's play, which is based on More. Weir didn't seem to stray any further than Shakespeare (the Oliver Stone of the Elizabethian age) to come to her conclusion.
Again, not her best work. She does a much better job with the Tudors.
Rating: 
Summary: THREE CHEERS FOR ANOTHER TRIUMPH FOR WEIR
Review: It thoroughly amazes me as I glance at the reviews that have been written about this book how little people truly put history into perspective. You may not agree with Alison Weir on her views of the princes in the tower but that does not mean her book is flawed in any sense. It also amazes me tht anyone could or would take Josephine Tey as a valid source of historical information. Lets review folks she wrote a work of fiction purely for entertainment purposes. .... Alison Weir presents a vivid backdrop that really takes you back to the time. Certainly I can agree that there are many theoretical hypthesis on the princes fates but I feel that Weir presents many of these possibities and also gives sound evidence and logical reasoning as to why most are not viable options. The only flaw I found in Weirs book is that she does not present the Duke of Buckingham as a potential threat to the princes but this point I think is well reviewed in Kendalls take on Richard III. I would recommend this work and any and all of Alison Weirs writing (Ive read them all). This truly is a triumph for Alison Weir.
Rating:
Summary: Highly Readable
Review: Well I do declare. I have no knowledge of English history. None.But I picked up this book last year and, drawn to it by the photographs in the middle, I read it and found it to be a fascinating analysis of an extraordinarily interesting historical situation. So recently I popped on to Amazon to enthuse over it and was dismayed to read so much sour sniping. Accusations of prejeudice and favoritism, and of poor research. Even the author's qualifications to write have been questioned!!! This is very bizarre since any examination of the book reveals that every single page is crammed with citations of original historical source material, and careful assessment of propaganda generated in later eras. The book also patently shows evidence of an avalanche of research behind it, and when Weir offers her opinions - and since this whole subject is all about opinion she does this very often - she makes it absolutely clear that she is offering speculation not fact. Readers are not idiots; they will understand, as I did, that there can be no proof in such a situation, only viewpoint, and that Alison Weir is quite entitled to hers. This book is a really good read. I wholeheartedly recommend it; and when you've done that - try some other books on the same subject as I am doing, and make up your own mind. You will find other authors offer widely differing analyses but none of them write a better book.
| 
