Learn more Shop now Learn more Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Learn More Shop now Learn more Click Here Shop Kindle George Michael - MTV Replugged Shop now Shop Women's Shop Men's

on 9 October 2009
Even though I'm a member of the Richard III Society and read everything I can lay my hands on about him and The wars of The Roses, I'm definitely not an expert. This book offers a new perspective on the execution of William Hastings in the Tower of London in 1483 and to my mind does a pretty convincing job. I've always been uneasy with some of the explanations regarding Hastings and his supposed plotting with the Woodvilles, and the alterntive suggestion as to why Hastings met such an untimely death might well be the correct one. Of course much of the book is based on supposition, which the author freely admits to and we will never know the truth. It is well worth a read but I would suggest that you might get more out of it with some background knowledge on the subject.
0Comment| 53 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 11 December 2011
I bought this book and tried really hard to read it (!) but ALL of the illustrations, graphs, photos, relevant land title documents etc are missing in the Kindle edition rendering it very difficult indeed to follow if you don't already possess a fairly good knowledge of that period of history. I loved the way it was written and he clearly seems to have researched his sources brilliantly and I was truly disappointed not to be able to enjoy it properly and ended up giving up and asking Amazon for a refund. I will try to buy the print version of the book locally as I suspect it's a really great book and so this review is IN NO WAY intended to put anyone off the actual book which is well-written, has some new perspectives and is very well researched, but just to warn other potential Kindle edition purchasers about the lack of accompanying illustrations as it ruined it for me and made the book impossible to fully enjoy or understand. As I say, if you already possess an in-depth knowledge of that historical period, then you may find it far easier to follow but to a dimbo like me, it all proved a bit too complex. I'd definitely buy the print book though.
44 Comments| 33 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 31 October 2015
That Richard was responsible for the execution of Lord Hastings is not disputed by anyone, whether for or against him. What this book does is examine in details the whys and wherefores of this action and offers some insight into the principle players.
This book is a serious in-depth study of the situation and offers a clear (and believable) reason for Richard's actions. It is not a book that can be read in an afternoon as it requires considered appraisal at every stage.
Every person who is interested in Richard III, either as a person or King or is interested in the reign of Henry VII should have a copy of this book on their bookshelves.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 21 January 2010
Peter Hancock has written an intriguing, well researched and persuasive argument to explain the events surrounding Richard's decision to take the throne, and in particular the death of Hastings which has never, to my mind, been convincingly explained. Hancock's case fits the known facts better than the 'traditional' explanation does, and he has delved into the backgrounds of some hitherto largely overlooked characters to back up his theory with fact. On the odd occasion when he descends into speculation, he is meticulous in saying so and takes pains to explain why he thinks what he does.

Essential reading for anyone interested in Richard III, although I wouldn't recommend it for the novice as it assumes some prior knowledge of these events.
0Comment| 41 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 3 July 2016
Lets start from the fact that the author defends Richard III in every corner by interpreting historical facts and presenting an alternative series of events only to be in favour of the last Plantagenet King. He is obsessed and so badly wants to believe that there was a pre contract between Edward IV and Eleanor Tablot when there is no clear evidence. Furthermore, he defends Richard against the executions of Hastings, Rivers, Woodviles with unspeakable excuses. I give two stars only because the author put a massive effort to present tones of historical information and references but the interpretation of those facts, it shows clearly that he keeps no neutral stance but just in favour of Richard. This book is not for me who wants to read history and not a historical propaganda.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 20 January 2010
As a very committed Ricardian of some 40+ years, it was very refreshing to read a book about Richard that concentrated on facts and actual documentation, rather than opinions of various commentators who were not privy to such information.

The hypothesis about the reason for Hastings execution being the concealment of his knowledge of the pre-contract from Richard rather than a plot with the Woodvilles (who were Hastings' opponents), certainly seems to me a more realistic reason for the event, especially when you consider the rewards showered upon Catesby who revealed Hastings' deception to Richard. Richard's fierce anger at Hastings' betrayal (something Richard abhorred, as his enduring loyalty to his brother shows) makes sense, and I agree with the author that when he calmed down he regretted his action, bearing in mind his generous treatment of Hastings' widow.

The book is put together very well with very little speculation about events, rather relying on factual provable information. I enjoyed it very much, and highly recommend it to students of this historical period, whether Ricardians or not.
11 Comment| 60 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 3 July 2015
The author's basic premise is that everything Richard III did was highly moral or can be justified in terms of the standards of his own era. Much of the book is speculation heaped on speculation - if you want an unbiased account of the events of the summer of 1483, look elsewhere.
0Comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 20 October 2009
Whilst I am a Ricardian at heart and can argue his "innocence" as regards the Princes in the tower.....(Henry VII and his role in their disappearance has not been inspected closely enough in my view) ...his murder of William Lord Hastings has left a bad taste in the mouth and difficult to explain. The Woodville plot and role of Jane Shore as some kind of go between just doesn`t ring true, and the report from More about Richard`s withered arm and sorcery belongs in childrens fiction.
Until now..... Mr Hancock has provided a well reasoned argument for Hastings despatch and Richards behaviour, based on the loyalty vs betrayal in the latters mind that fateful morning, and why his mood changed so dramatically.
The role of Catesby and his family connection to Eleanor Butler is appealing and his execution post Bosworth endorses the view. Maybe some day documentation from the pre-contract may emerge.....until then this explanation is the most convincing.
44 Comments| 43 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 3 November 2010
The title may mislead you into thinking the book concerns the 'princes in the tower'. It does not. The purpose of the book is to justify Richard's claim to the throne, with Hancock believing the later you believe Richard sought the throne, the better view you have of him.

Peter A. Hancock offers a convincing theory (except maybe Jane Shore's role) that Richard did not seek the throne until a break in a council meeting to gather strawberries on Friday 13th June 1483, when Catesby informed him of his late brother Edward IV's pre-contract with Eleanor Butler. This therefore bastardised the late king's children with Elizabeth Woodville, including the two 'princes in the tower' Edward V and Richard, Duke of York. Furthermore, Catesby informed Richard that Hastings had concealed his knowledge of the contract, leading to his immediate execution following the break-up of the meeting; the 'murder in the tower'.

This is the second Ricardian book I have read; the first being John Ashdown-Hill's 'The Last Days of Richard III', and it has really ignited my interest in the period and has confirmed my pro-Ricardian leanings.

This is the first review I have awarded 5 stars to; I do not give that lightly!
0Comment| 20 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 7 November 2013
You could say that I'm a Ricardian. That I've never believed in the monster created by Shakespere and portrayed so magnificently by Olivier. Having said that Mr Hancock looks at the bizarre course of events that led to the extremely fast execution of Lord Hastings in the tower, and does so convincingly in a very well constructed book. Here we see Richard the man ( or as close to the man as is possible) but more importantly we see Richard set in his own time embroiled in the rather vicious politics of the day and not judged with modern day sympathies , values or morals. We see him struggling against all sorts of deceits, plots and betrayals by power hungry magnates. He was certainly up against it !
Shakespere's propaganda has ingrained itself into our English history. The Tudors rather tenuous claim to the throne of England had to be justified somehow and how better than to completely destroy the last Plantagenet king by word as well as by deed.
Whether you beleive in Shakespere and/ or the Tudor propaganda or not you should read this book. It is refreshing.
0Comment| 9 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)