If you want a non-biased, impartial, factual read with primary sources to back up the facts on the 'Wars of the Roses & deaths of the Princes in the Tower' - then this is NOT for you.
After a few minutes reading I had to get my pen out & start striking through assumptions, quotes that the author claimed to be contemporary which were in fact reports/stories that were written many years after the events took place (which is quite clear if you check her appendix!), gossip & tittle-tattle quoted as fact, & most glaringly of all, the authors complete bias against Richard III. She is even quoting, in her own words, 'an untrustworthy source' (ref Molinet, page 149) - if the source is untrustworthy then why is a historian even using it?!
Irritatingly she states the emotions of the source of her gossip and the main players too! Which is fine for a historical fiction but not for a 'fact based history book'.
Uses text such as 'ALMOST CERTAINLY...this happened'P123 & P148 'More was PROBABLY nearer the truth when he conjectured...'!
There is also a number of inconsistencies in her version of events.
EG that the author of the Croyland Chronicle is ANONYMOUS (p4) yet goes on to assume who this person was & (p126) that he WAS on the Council!
& On P141 she says that 'Rivers had been deputy constable but that appointment had LAPSED when he was arrested.' But earlier that 'Rivers had GIVEN the appointment to Dorset!'
This is not a good book! & I'm surprised that the cover includes quotes such as 'Absorbing' Sunday Times, lucidly written - oh also Sunday Times(!) - NOT!