The Tower: The Tumultuous History of the Tower of London from 1078

by Derek Wilson

Records the intriguing history of the Tower of London from 1078, when William the Conqueror ordered its construction, through its various functions as palace, fortress, zoo, and mint

Genres: History, Nonfiction, London, British Literature

257 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1979

About the author

Derek Wilson has been a writer of historical fiction and non-fiction for 50 years. His much acclaimed prize-winning works have largely centred on 16th and 17th century Europe. He has used various pen names for his fiction, his current Thomas Treviot Tudor crime series being written under the name D.K. Wilson. The first 2 books in this series - The First Horseman and The Traitor's Mark are based on real unsolved Tudor mysteries and have received enthusiastic plaudits. Readers have favourably compared this innovative series with the books of C.J. Sansom and S.J. Parris.
Recent non-fiction triumphs include The Plantagenets, Holbein: Portrait of an Unknown Man, and Charlemagne: a Biography.
Derek Wilson graduated from Cambridge and spent several years travelling and teaching in Africa before becoming a full-time writer and broadcaster in 1971. He has frequently written and appeared on radio and television and is popular as a public speaker having appeared at several literary festivals,British Museum, Hampton Court Palace, The British Library and other prestigious venues.

Reviews

[Terri · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had just gotten back from a London trip and picked up this book. I thought it was fascinating to read about the battles and deeds of shame surrounding the tower's history. We had seen the Tower of London and so it was fresh in my mind. He included black and white photos in the book but I wish there had been more. It helps if you already have a background in British history when reading this book. I think it did spark futher interest in the history of the Tower for me and prompted my future trips to London.

[Clare · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learned much from this book. Starting off as just a motte and bailey, the Tower of London was enlarged over the years into the place it is today. Through the years it served as both a royal residence and a jail. It also once had a mint, an ordnance, and a menagerie.
This book not only tells about the many famous people who were imprisoned there but gives the background about political and historical events which led to their incarceration. Most of the prisoners were of the upper class and actually had some fairly nice accommodations while awaiting their trial or their release. They sometimes were even able to have family members live there with them for awhile. The tumultuous history of England itself is represented by the story of the Tower and this book illustrates how the change in monarch or the prevailing attitudes of the times engendered changes in this historic structure and its environs.

[Dean · Rating 4 out of 5]

First the bad. The book is a little dated in its content and style, having been written over 40 years ago, and the author clearly has various hills he’s happy to die on. Modern historical scholarship has moved on in the meantime.
That being said, the author has a nice enough style, and covers a lot of ground in an easily readable way. We travel from the 11th century to the 20th in 200 odd pages, and it’s always a nice read with a few nuggets here and there that extend your knowledge.
Not a definitive book on the Tower, but a very readable one.

[Sarah - All The Book Blog Names Are Taken · Rating 3 out of 5]

Full review to come. Updated edition would be great. Illustrations were good. Dry read. My love/hate relationship with Wilson continues.

Wavering between 2 and 3 stars.

++++++++++++

My book Blog: http://allthebookblognamesaretaken.bl...

and

https://www.facebook.com/AllTheBookBl...

I had to keep reminding myself that this edition was published in 1979. It was not easy and I often found myself frustrated with some of the things Wilson wrote as fact. On the other hand, he also puts forth some of those same sentiments in more recent books, so, there's that to deal with as well (he is NOT a fan of Mary Tudor). As a result, I waver back and forth between two and three stars. The reason I did not finish this one is not due to the dryness of the writing, but to lack of interest in the periods following the reign of James VI/I. I did give it a go, but decided there are too many other books waiting for me.

The text was good, not great. Much of that is owed to the fact that it was written so long ago and the way we look at these eras is quite different, even from the way historians viewed them 40 years ago. I feel like this text would be much stronger if it was updated - not only to reflect more accurate facts as we know them now about those early periods, but so the Tower can be presented now up to it current status and function. As an aside, it still pains me that when Mom and I were in London as part of our UK Extravaganza, we had such short time in London itself that we were not able to see the Tower. This is, without a doubt, #2 on my list of attractions to visit (#1 encompassing any and every place still in existence connected to Eleanor of Aquitaine, of course.)

The many factual inaccuracies were distracting, despite my own attempt to remember it was 40 years old. For example, Wilson refers to de Burgh as being the man who held the most authority in Henry III's reign, due to him being an experienced soldier and administrator. To that I had to say, "Um, helloooo, ever heard of this man by the name of WILLIAM MARSHAL?!" I do have quite a soft spot in my heart for that ol' soldier and always like to see him get his due.

Moving on to the Tudor reign, there were a few issues I took with statements Wilson made as well. Now, I have never made it a secret that have no good feelings about Anne Boleyn. Catherine will always be the rightful and true queen to me, as Mary was always the rightful heir. That does mean that I support everything Mary did during her reign, but I do think everything that happened to her during her childhood once Henry initiated the divorce need to be weighed greatly in understanding how that impacted her. No one can really be surprised in how tightly she clung to her faith and viewed Catholicism as the only religion, given its treatment in her lifetime as a means to an end for Henry to get what he wanted. I know this is not a popular opinion among some and that is fine, but Wilson's assessment of Mary's reign as an "appalling blunder" by the English when they supported Mary instead of her cousin Lady Jane Grey is inaccurate in my eyes. Given a closer and less biased look, there were many aspects of Mary's reign that actually proved quite successful. While that is another debate for another post and I won't go into detail here, I might recommend The First Queen of England: The Myth of Bloody Mary for anyone interested in what I am suggesting. Continuing along this path, I was confused when Wilson states that Catherine Parr died in childbirth "or probably before". Everything I have read thus far indicates she died after giving birth to a daughter, who also did not live long - perhaps a year or two. I am curious as to where Wilson got this idea and if that was accepted as fact in the 1970s, where new information came from since then to change what we know now. He also cites tuberculosis as the cause of death for Edward, which gave way to Mary's reign. While it is certainly one of the theories, there have been others put forth as well. Again I wonder if this could be that TB was accepted in the 1970s and only with new information coming to light have we changed our thinking?

There are positives to the book, do not get me wrong. I found the illustrations included to be useful. Another reason I would like to see a new edition to the book would be to see new photographs of the Tower added in comparison. It would be very interesting to see drawings of the original structure, compared to how it looks now.

I realize that the issues I have touched on had more to do with the people connected to the Tower than the Tower itself. All in all, this is because this book was as much about the people who inhabited the the fortress as the buildings themselves. This I can appreciate, as it covered all of the periods in England's history that are among my most favorite (and more - if you have been reading my reviews for a while, you know I don't have much interest beyond the reign of James VI/I). I wish there would be an update, though if you can keep in mind the age, then I can recommend with some hesitancy. It is very dry at times after all and that could be very off-putting for those who are less interested in the times.

[Jenny OH · Rating 4 out of 5]

Engagingly written with plenty of quotations from and references to primary sources, this book firmly sets the history of this important English building within the greater English, British, and European stage.

[Gill Staunton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating ...

[Christie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Picked this up prior to a trip to London. Very detailed history of the Tower of London. I learned a great deal that I had not known before, and it definitely helped me appreciate the Tower even more when we visited it a few weeks after I read this book. I do think the author gave a bit too much credence to rumors and tall tales, but overall it was an enjoyable and informative read.

[Kara]

I just couldn't get into it. I think a new edition is in order.

[Gayle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Informative, but very dry reading.