Thoughts on The Princes in the Tower by Alison Weir

Ever since I read The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey, I have considered myself a noncommittal Ricardian. The book claims that the rumors about Richard III were the result of highly effective Tudor propaganda. But, as an article I recently read on ars Technica states, "It's a great read, but it hardly qualifies as a scholarly argument," even if it does make a very convincing argument. In The Princes in the Tower, Weir promises to keep an open mind on the subject, and I feel she did just that. She basically presents the 'evidence' which are historical accounts of the time, and one or two which were written many years later. There are some very convincing points made, such as, if Richard did not kill the princes (have them killed), then why didn't he present them to the public to prove his innocence? There are more such points made. On my part, I'm still noncommittal, but I do feel what I learned from this book has brought me down on the side of Richard being guilty. Of course, we truly will never know the truth. Without eyewitness accounts and/or a confession from Richard himself, it all comes down to educated opinions of he did or he didn't.

I found this book enthralling, though admittedly this is a topic of which I have always had a great interest.

Never miss a post!

* indicates required

Email Address *