The Mystery of the Princes

by Audrey Williamson

The best investigative history into the fate of the two nephews of Richard III. The 'Princes in the Tower' is a cause celebre of English history. Did Richard III murder his two nephews Edward V and Prince Richard to usurp the throne of England? Shakespeare certainly thought so and together with later Tudor propagandists - keen to legitimize their new royal dynasty - Richard became a hunchback, crippled by his evil deeds. Drawing on contemporary documents and the latest historical research Audrey Williamson reveals the shocking conspiracy to conceal the truth.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Medieval

192 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1978

Reviews

[Brenda Clough · Rating 2 out of 5]

Gosh, this is tough sledding. If you don't already know all the people in the story, and if you can't instantly distinguish between the two or three Richards, the four or five Edwards, and the three or four Henrys floating around, this is not the book for you. A book only for the reader who is thoroughly familiar with all the history and is ISO analysis. What you really want to read, to introduce you to this material, is THE DAUGHTER OF TIME by Josephine Tey -- a detective novel, but far far more palatable.

[Kristin · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've had this book on my shelf for a long time, and I think I would have enjoyed it more when I bought it. First of all, it is quite dated at this point in its information, as one would expect as it is nearly forty years old. A great deal of new information has come to light since it was published (particularly the discovery of Richard III's burial site), some of which invalidates Williamson's conclusions. Second, those conclusions are not historically rigorous. Williamson (whose background I do not know) prides herself on her more rigorous evaluation of the available evidence than previous scholars had attempted. Yet substantial portions of her arguments are based on what she calls the "human factor," that is, making assumptions about how humans (uncles and nephews, husbands and wives, mothers and the supposed murderers of their sons) relate to one another. While it is important to recognize these relationships in trying to understand the evidence, I think she places far too much weight on these points (even while criticizing other authors for doing the same). Overall, it was interesting to read such a thorough evaluation of the available sources for Richard's reign, but I would be interested in seeing a more up-to-date version.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally published in 1978 in the UK, and in 1986 in the US, this look at the Princes in the Tower is notable as much for what it isn’t as for what it is. What it isn’t is another crack-brained “solution” to the story of Edward V and his brother Richard, Duke Of York , with fingers pointed at Richard III or Henry VII or the Duke Of Buckingham or Archbishop Morton or the Illuminati as the heinous culprits. What it is , rather, is a clear headed look at their disappearance as a crime, and it applies common sense and solid investigative techniques to the information at hand in order to formulate theories of what actually might have happened. Williamson offers no solution (it is, after all, a mystery), but does suggest possible lines of inquiry for future research. Sadly, not much has changed in the world of matters Ricardian; even the recent discovery of Richard III ‘s remains has done little to change prevailing attitudes among historians and researchers. Still, Williamson’s little book remains intriguing food for thought.

[Thomas Canfield · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Mystery of the Princes, Audrey Williamson’s account of the disappearance and alleged murder of Richard the Third’s two nephews, is a gripping retelling of a tale which has fascinated historians, scholars and readers alike for over five hundred years.

What actually happened to the Princes, who was involved and what role did Richard himself play has furnished material for countless writers, Shakespeare and Thomas Moore amongst them, over the centuries. The mystery, unresolved still and likely to remain so, provides ample scope for speculation and debate. It arouses fierce passions and open partisanship among those supporting one theory or another.

Williamson’s account is an absolute top notch read. She reconstructs the circumstances, furnishes details and quotes sources with the skill and clarity of a gifted trial lawyer. This may sound a little dry (lawyers being what they are). It is anything but. It is Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, Sam Spade - pick your favorite sleuth.

Moreover, this crime revolves around vastly larger issues: the quest for power, the clash of opposing claims, ambition, plotting, betrayal - it’s all of it here. It is also strikingly relevant to the world of today. The cast of characters changes but the themes are eternal.

A must read for history buffs or for anyone who savors a good mystery.

[Pauline Calkin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Published in 1978, it is one of the earlier works devoted to the mystery of the princes. It actually recounts the events of Richard III’s protectorship and reign in some detail with references to Mancini, More and other near contemporary sources. It satisfied my curiosity on some matters. For instance, Kendall states that Thomas Lynom did not marry “Jane” Shore, but most other sources indicate he did. Which is it? Williamson concludes he did, citing her father’s 1487 will in which he refer to his daughter Elizabeth Lineman. Also, More may have avoided implicating Brackenbury in the murders because Carmeliano, a humanist and poet, who probably introduced Mancini to Dr. Argentine, was friendly with Brackenbury whom he referred to as “gentle” Brackenbury.

The book suffers from outdated information. Thus, in discussing the Elizabeth of York’s letter to Howard, the author doesn’t have the benefit of knowing about the Portuguese marriage negotiations. And then there is the rather odd discussion about Richard and Anne’s lack of fecundity in which it is assumed—wrongly— that contraception was not known during that time. Maybe, Richard was just too puritanical or just a-sexual she suggests, explaining that his two bastards were the product of his teenage years when he was trying to imitate his big brother. Despite these hiccups, I found the book interesting and enlightening.

[Kathy · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Mystery of the Princes
By Audrey Williamson
Reviewed July 21, 2023


The Mystery of the Princes by Audrey Williamson was originally published in 1978, and while some of the information may be dated by later research and discoveries I still found it to be a well organized look into one of history’s most famous cold cases, the disappearance of the Princes in the Tower – Edward of Westminster and Richard of Shrewsbury.

Did their uncle, King Richard III, order their deaths? Did they die of natural causes? Did they die as a result of someone else’s intervention, or did they somehow survive? Ms. Williamson doesn’t try to solve the mystery, but rather shows us several possibilities, allowing the reader to make up his or her own mind. That she has a positive opinion of Richard doesn’t keep me from seeing her theories as having merit.

It’s difficult if not impossible to separate the fate of these boys with the events of 1483-1485, so in addition to looking into “who (if anyone) done it”, we also get very readable accounting of the events of the succession crisis of 1483 as well as Richard III’s short, 2-year reign that ended with his death at Bosworth.

But the story doesn’t end there, and history shows us that the fate of the young princes continued to haunt Henry VII, and so from Bosworth we continue with a chapter devoted to Perkin Warbeck (was he the true king, or a pretender?), another to James Tyrell (murderer or victim?), a look at the Westminster bones, and the authors own thoughts as to what may have happened.

What I liked about this book, besides its readability, is that Ms. Williamson addressed several points that I’ve wondered about, such as the fact that when we read about the people rising against Richard, we’re talking about disgruntled nobles and lords, most of whom were Southerners who didn’t like Richard bringing his Northern adherents to fill positions of authority, or were long-time Lancastrians who saw a weakness and exploited it, not the whole of England.

Ms. Williamson makes use of many primary and secondary documents, and also brings out discrepancies in early accounts, such as when the Croyland Chronicler writes that it was Henry Tudor and his knights who made straight for Richard III during the Battle of Bosworth, when all other accounts as well as archaeological evidence show that the opposite is actually what happened.

This book was loaned to me by a fellow Ricardian (thank you, Pauline), and I liked it so much that I ended up buying a copy to add to my own library.

[Renee Marski · Rating 3 out of 5]

While an interesting take on the murder of the princes you can see how revisionists overlook key facts. Hastings was the one to call Richard to London but then betrays him? Buckingham is richly rewarded for his support of Richard but is tempted away for no more than empty promises? None of which make sense mind you. The only thing that does are a few interesting family tales. That of a Richard Plantegent who was a brick layer and the story of the Dowager Queen staying at Gipping hall with the boys. Honestly i ended up with more questions than answers.

[Tom · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fairly solid defence of the claim that Richard III had to have killed the Princes in the tower but there are a few problems that others have noted. It is written in a very dense and academic way which makes it hard to penetrate at times and was quite difficult to read. The other issue is, as others have mentioned, that it needs updating, hopefully one day, someone will come along and do a similar piece of work with new evidence (and hopefully permission will be given to examine the bones found at the bottom of the tower steps).

[Becca Owen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have had this book a few years so I thought it was finally time to read it.
I did find some of the sentences long and complicated, having to read them a few times to understand the point the author was making.
Saying this, I thought the points made were very interesting, not just blaming Richard III but putting other names forward. Since this book was written new evidence has come to life but still worth a read if interested in the subject.

[Dawn · Rating 1 out of 5]

Too technical. Too plodding.

[Denise Rawling · Rating 5 out of 5]

This clear presentation of the known sources stands the test of time. It is meticulously researched and written with clarity and forthright energy.

[Jay Blake · Rating 3 out of 5]

Too many Edwards, Henry’s and Richards. I’ve read half the book and have put it down for now.

[Zoran Milovanovic · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book would no doubt please the Richard the Third Society. Although facts are presented the suggestions offered to who didn't kill the princes are less than probable and at times give outrageous conjecture.

However, for a read full of maybes... perhaps... it could be that... and Williamson persuading the reader to go along with half baked, flimsy far-fetched arguments,then you may (along with The Richard the Third society) find it entertaining.

I myself found the whole tale (although giving the reader a full account of the players) wholly unbelievable. Having said that, my view has probably intrigued readers to give it a try.

As this book is now dated, new evidence has come to light which paradoxically actually helps in part Audrey Williamson's tale.

[Debbie · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have read lots on this topic - Kendall, Ross, Gairdner, etc. - so I know the topic. This is one of the most tedious books I have ever read and it took me forever to get through it..I can not believe it won the Crime Writer's Association Gold Dagger award for nonfiction - was there no one who wrote an interesting book that year?

This is a real mystery - one that will probably never be solved - it changed the course of English history - so it is exciting, important, interesting, and even - in the right writer's hands - thrilling. This was not the writer.

[Mlg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very scholarly and well researched book on the disappearance of the two little princes. Lots of primary source material, I'm still not sure who killed them, or if they were murdered.

[Lisette · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read after I came back from my honeymoon in England and I was a little obsessed with British history.