Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes by Bertram Fields

Dec 12, 2008 Pete daPixie rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history-roses, history-anglorum-rex

This 500 year mystery, only deepened by later Tudor re-writing of history is very expertly disentangled. The treatment of Richard III by Thomas More, Shakespeare etc.,largely remains the popular view today. Fields cross examines both the Tudor propagandists and modern writers like Weir, to show Richard in a new light. The mystery of the Prince's in the tower remains, but the likelihood of regicide committed by Richard diminishes.

1 like · like · see review

May 09, 2009 Kim rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: favorites, war-of-the-roses

A thorough rendition of the many factors, events, and behaviors in an extremely turbulent period of English history, Bertram Fields lays out his analysis of one of the most enduring mysteries: the fate of the 'Princes of the Tower', the child king Edward V and his brother, Richard, Duke of York.

Fields' analysis of the situation is thorough in its attempt to determine the guilt of Richard III in the deaths of his nephews. Indeed, by looking closely at many of the established 'facts', Fields actu...more

like · see review

Jan 19, 2011 Darkpool rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, historical, richard-iii, myr3collection, read-this-century-bg

Fields is an LA entertainment lawyer not really the sort of person one would expect to write a Richard III history! He has approached the book - and the mystery of the princes in the tower - from a lawyerly point of view: looked at the evidence, examined the credibility of the witnesses (contemporary sources), had a bit of a go at the findings of other historians (a la cross examination), etc. He's particularly scathing of Alison Weir one of Richard's most recent (and most condemning) biographer...more

like · see review

Dec 23, 2012 Luci rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book should really be read after Weir's "The Princes in the Tower." In this work, Fields works to shed new light on the disappearance of the sons of Edward IV. Interestingly enough, Fields uses his particular background, that of law to pursue his thesis.

Fields' work is refreshing in that, while he advocates for Richard, he is never completely convinced that Richard may not be guilty. In other words, this might be the most straightforward account of the mystery and the possible suspects. It...more

1 like · like · see review

May 04, 2012 Louis Profeta Profeta rated it 5 of 5 stars

Kevin Spacey played Richard lll at the Brooklyn Academy in a very unusual way, the maddest madman.He sparked my interest to Shakespeare's Tempest and Antony and Cleopatra, the tragedies, I was reciting out load, what fun to hear the language out of me.
Richard lll, was depressed some, his family was becoming small, the king had died and his you son was the heir and Richard was aflamed in want of a crown for his head, he marries his brother's wife, kills his, takes the old king's two young sons an...more

like · see review

Oct 14, 2011 GoldGato rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history, autumn, royalty

I found this to be a very good take on the who-killed-the-royal-princes question that still remains unsolved centuries later. As an attorney, Fields approaches the question with a clearer eye than most, laying down the motives for each proposed murderer. Like many, I feel that Richard III received a raw deal, but history's winners dictate the final version. However, the author provided me with full research, so that I wouldn't just say it was them darn Tudors.

Read the book and decide for yoursel...more

like · see review

Nov 08, 2012 Delafere rated it 1 of 5 stars

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Bertram Fields lends his voice to the historical mystery of the fate of the Princes in the tower and the truth of Richard III murdering them. Frankly he wastes his time. He spends most of the book critising other authors, most notably Alison Weir against whom he seems to have some unexplicable grudge. Unlike him she at least is willing to give the reader a full bibliography and footnotes. I'm not sure why he thought it was ok to publish a historical work without footnotes but it is most frustrat...more

1 like · like · see review

May 08, 2013 Eddy Allen rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: arts-and-historical

Notoriously immortalied by Shakespeare and historians, he is history's most infamous royal villian: Richard III, king of England from 1483 to 1485. Crazed with power and paranoia, he is generally supposed to have killed the youthful Prince of Wales and the aged Henry VI, drowned his brother in a vat of wine, poisoned his wife, and, worst of all, murdered his two young nephews, the older of whom was the rightful king--a reign of terror ending only with his own cowardly death on the blood-soaked f...more

like · see review

Jan 30, 2013 Marilyn rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: british-monarchy-renaissance-era

Royal Blood, by author Bertram Fields could have been a great book. Mr.Fields most certainly came in to the court room, having done all his homework. In many ways, I would say that Mr. Fields went beyond the call of duty to give King Richard III as fair a trial, as would be possible. I did admire him for that, because anyone vaugely familiar with the mystery of the Princes in the Tower are concerned, the cards have been stacked against King Richard III all along.

The turn off for me, was the fact...more

like · see review

Jul 30, 2012 Samantha rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book was impossible to put down! Fields does an excellent job of analyzing the difficult questions relating to Richard III and the princes in the tower. He expertly separates the issues of Richard's motivations for taking the throne, whether or not the princes were really killed, and if they were who did it. He quotes several sources and discusses their reliability and views the potential truths with a lawyer's eye. His research includes contemporary sources, current writers, and everyone i...more This book was impossible to put down! Fields does an excellent job of analyzing the difficult questions relating to Richard III and the princes in the tower. He expertly separates the issues of Richard's motivations for taking the throne, whether or not the princes were really killed, and if they were who did it. He quotes several sources and discusses their reliability and views the potential truths with a lawyer's eye. His research includes contemporary sources, current writers, and everyone in between. Though I enjoyed the level of detail and discussion in this book, I can understand how others may feel inundated with facts and theories. Certainly if you are a Plantagenat fan you will enjoy this book. Not that Fields attempts to exonerate Richard III. Taking his balanced and thorough approach, he can only say that we don't know if Richard killed his nephews and that there are other suspects. I enjoyed the chapter where he analyzed the motives and opportunities of these other suspects and could have had more on this particular topic. Unlike other authors, Fields does not pretend that he can with certaintly solve this 500+ year old murder/disappearance.

Others have commented on Fields' attacks on Weir throughout the book. I will agree that at times it seems that his driving force shifts from solving a mystery to proving Weir wrong. Knowing that Fields is a lawyer, I couldn't help at times envisioning him as the prosecuting attorney and Weir as the defense. On the other hand, I appreciated knowing that Weir does not take the unbiased, educated approach to each of her topics since I have read several of her books. I do think though that attacking her with such drama showed a lack of professionalism on Fields' part when it is unnecessary since he does a fabulous job of making his case without it.

I enjoyed how Fields looked at the case from many perspectives - did Richard have the motive, opportunity, & character to kill the princes, and so forth. He never assumes that they died at any certain time or that they were even murdered. He also does not assume that the Richard portrayed by Tudor historians is fully accurate, though he does use those sources to attempt to determine Richard's character along with other sources. In the end, we still don't know if those little skeletons were really a boy king and his brother or if their uncle was a ruthless killer. I will chose to believe that Richard was the loyal, accomplished King who trusted the wrong people and went to his death too soon, but Fields writes his analysis in a way that you are free to believe either one.(less)

like · see review

Jul 02, 2012 Edward rated it 5 of 5 stars

Fields' book is a refreshing addition to the subject of the Princes. Most books on this subject veer to the extremes of authors such as Kendall, who assert Richard's total innocence; to Weir, who paints Richard as being an utter fiend and monster who schemed from the beginning to take the throne. Fields effectively demolishes most of Weir's circular and self-serving arguments, yet does not completely absolve Richard of responsibility. Fields is also one of the only authors to place Richard real...more

like · see review

Jan 05, 2013 Donna Maguire rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: historical-non-fict, 2013-books-to-read, library-books-read

I started to read this book as I am currently going through a Richard III phase and reading quite a few books that cover his short reign.
I was sceptical when I started to read this, being written by someone who, according to the books jacket is ‘widely regarded as the most prominent entertainment lawyer in the US’, but I am interested in hearing other people’s views on what has happened and if could really answer the mystery of the Princes in the Tower as it claimed, I was all for it as no-one e...more I started to read this book as I am currently going through a Richard III phase and reading quite a few books that cover his short reign.
I was sceptical when I started to read this, being written by someone who, according to the books jacket is ‘widely regarded as the most prominent entertainment lawyer in the US’, but I am interested in hearing other people’s views on what has happened and if could really answer the mystery of the Princes in the Tower as it claimed, I was all for it as no-one else has managed to do this to date!
The book in itself is easy to read, but it is more of a story than a piece of historical non-fiction research. The book has no footnotes, nothing to say where he has taken quotes from and he does not back up his own research, not really what I expected. I am also not a fan of the way that the book continually swipes at Alison Weir, if you do not like her as an author, fine, but to issue a book basically criticising her work without referencing your own is not really fair. This really again comes down to the mystery of the “Princes in the Tower” and the author not liking the assumptions that she has made in her book of the same name and her findings that Richard III was responsible for their disappearance and probable murder.
In summary the book claims to answer histories old mysteries – was Edward IV’s marriage truly legal? – this is not answered and there are other books now which claim that this wasn’t and he did have a pre-contract with Eleanor Butler. Were his sons, Edward and Richard illegitimate? – this is not covered properly as the question above is not answered and they tie in to each other inextricably, it also fails to mention that if the two boys were illegitimate, so are all the daughters, including the daughter who will be the future Queen, Elizabeth of York. Were the bones found in the Tower of London those of the young princes? This isn’t answered either but as the Queen has refused to have the bones DNA tested it is also unlikely to be answered and as for – was there even a murder? The point of it being a mystery is that no-one does actually know.
The worst section for me is the ‘what if’ – what if Richard has never accepted the Crown and how would our lives have been changed? – this section is full of huge speculations and for me it ruins the end of the book which could quite easily have ended after the section summing up the authors ‘findings’ as this is just the author’s personal opinions, opinions he has attacked when other authors have given them.
In my opinion - overall easy to read, but disappointing(less)

like · see review

Aug 09, 2012 Orsolya rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history, library, wars-of-the-roses, own, richard-iii

If the Princes in the Tower were Hollywood actors, their disappearance would be a scandal for the ages. Who am I kidding? Their death at the hands of their uncle Richard III (supposedly) is a scandal and is my favorite real-life mystery. Bertram Fields, an entertainment lawyer, breaks down the case using court/trial analysis in “Royal Blood”.

“Royal Blood” is a very unique piece, combining a traditional history portrait with a modern-day courtroom breakdown. Fit for both new-comers to the topic (...more If the Princes in the Tower were Hollywood actors, their disappearance would be a scandal for the ages. Who am I kidding? Their death at the hands of their uncle Richard III (supposedly) is a scandal and is my favorite real-life mystery. Bertram Fields, an entertainment lawyer, breaks down the case using court/trial analysis in “Royal Blood”.

“Royal Blood” is a very unique piece, combining a traditional history portrait with a modern-day courtroom breakdown. Fit for both new-comers to the topic (as “Royal Blood” thoroughly retells the background from the “Wars of the Roses” onward to Henry VII’s reign) and for those well-versed on the subject (a great refresher course); “Royal Blood” is an engaging work which will satisfy most readers. Admittedly, Bertram’s work can be overwhelming with its extreme detail and is not an “easy” work in the sense that light reading is encouraged in order to truly retain all of Bertram’s “investigation”.

Bertram’s research is truly remarkable resulting in many “a-ha!” moments and alternative views which the reader may not previously have considered. Bertram examines every area possible from biases of historians (both contemporary and modern), motives of those surrounding Richard and the Princes, wording of documents and quotes, dates and alibis, etc. Although Bertram doesn’t come across new facts per se; it feels like he does because of his exposed angles. Even the actual figures involved would learn about their own actions, having read “Royal Blood”!

My complaint with “Royal Blood” is that although Bertram doesn’t display outright biases, it is quite evident throughout that he is pro-Ricardian as his presentation of Richard’s opposition is weak in comparison. Not to mention, there are moments when Richard displays ruthless ambition and behavior which the opposing parties could question but Bertram just glosses over it.

Another annoying aspect is Bertram’s constant bashing and attempts to discredit Alison Weir’s book on the Princes. I understand the “love it or hate it” support (or lack thereof) of Weir, but the constant mentions were tedious. Is Bertram writing a book simply to harass Weir or to instead investigate the disappearance of the Princes? Sometimes, one can’t tell and Bertram seems childish.

There are also moments when Bertram repeats himself several times in one section to make sure his point is made. This loses reader attention and some credibility (we get it, already!).

Despite these complaints, the pace of “Royal Blood” is strong and even with its depth of information, is accessible and easy to understand by a modern reader. Although Bertram is not a historian, it is impressive how much he knows about the topic. I was pleasantly surprised as I was worried about his credibility. Then again, he never called himself an expert, so the reader has to take it with a grain of salt, anyway.

One of the highlights in “Royal Blood” is the chapter on Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck. This is one of my favorite areas and Bertram satisfies with a well-layered stripping, exploring many theories. Bertram continues to make astounding yet simple points (I had many regrets of “Why didn’t I think of that?!”) until the very end including such topics as Richard’s supposed humpback and the identity of the bones thought to be that of the Princes. Bertram’s theories are clear, rational, and make sense throughout.

Personally, I was let down by the lack of direct quotes (very rare) and a proper notes or bibliography section (notes were absent and the bibliography was very limited). This will not gratify the reader who likes to check historical notation.

Whether you are for or against Richard, Bertram’s “Royal Princes” is a terrific read to receive an all-around understanding of the Princes of the Tower and will definitely spark further debate or thought from the reader in a very creative and unique way.
(less)

6 likes · like · see review

Apr 10, 2009 Ikonopeiston rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: serious students of Richard III and the Princes in the Tower controversy

Shelves: non-fiction, ricardian

I found this to be an excellent and logical survey of the problem of the disappearance of the sons of Edward IV of England from their residence in the Tower of London. Fields examines all the known facts with a lawyer's eye and assigns each of them the weight he believes it would command in a court of law. What a relief from the sometimes overheated arguments of both Traditionalists and Revisionists. The only reason I have withheld a fifth star is that on frequent occasions the book seems more i...more I found this to be an excellent and logical survey of the problem of the disappearance of the sons of Edward IV of England from their residence in the Tower of London. Fields examines all the known facts with a lawyer's eye and assigns each of them the weight he believes it would command in a court of law. What a relief from the sometimes overheated arguments of both Traditionalists and Revisionists. The only reason I have withheld a fifth star is that on frequent occasions the book seems more inspired by a desire to discredit Alison Weir than to present a reasoned case.

Weir is, of course, the author of a widely read book on the same subject which makes no pretense at balance but is determined to prove Richard the villain, the archetype of the Wicked Uncle in all the legends and folk stories since his day. Fields is apparently outraged by her partisanship and spends a good deal of time demolishing her conclusions with mockery as well as documented fact.

Other than that flaw, the book is beautifully laid out with the history of the Wars of the Roses adroitly summarized so that the novice reader has some basis on which to follow the discussion which follows. Like the attorney he is, Fields states his argument as often as is required to connect each fact to the others on which it impinges. Some readers may find this an irritant; I was delighted to read such carefully constructed prose. The significance of the bones discovered during an renovation of the Tower in 1674 is not ignored nor is the possibility that one or more of the Pretenders who challenged Henry Tudor for the throne may have actually been one of the Princes, alive long after Richard was slain. Not even the physical appearance of Richard himself is neglected in this amazingly compact survey of the value of the texts which supplied Holinshed and Shakespeare with their images of Richard.

All in all, I have no hesitation in recommending this book to any serious searcher into the mystery of the Princes in the Tower. It is not light reading, so be warned however, it richly repays the effort it demands. (less)

like · see review

Apr 29, 2008 Colleen rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: reviewed

Written by an entertainment lawyer, this book provides a new look at an old mystery. Ever since I read The Daughter of Time, I've been interested in the questions surrounding the murder of the princes in the Tower, so when I saw this book in the National Portait Gallery in London, I just had to buy it. While few of the facts mentioned in the book are new, the way Fields treats the case is certainly novel. Although using our current standards of evidence to judge a 500 year old crime may strike s...more

like · see review

Dec 21, 2008 Jillian rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: own, history-culture-politics, winter-break-08-09

_Royal Blood_ is a helpful, comprehensive, and at points even entertaining overview of the evidence for and against Richard III. While Fields clearly leans more towards the revisionist view (supporting Richard's innocence) he manages to lean without falling over, and seems more even-handed and open-minded than most authors writing on the topic. While I generally enjoyed and benefited from reading his book, however, I have several serious complaints:
1. While Fields notes the names of his sources...more _Royal Blood_ is a helpful, comprehensive, and at points even entertaining overview of the evidence for and against Richard III. While Fields clearly leans more towards the revisionist view (supporting Richard's innocence) he manages to lean without falling over, and seems more even-handed and open-minded than most authors writing on the topic. While I generally enjoyed and benefited from reading his book, however, I have several serious complaints:
1. While Fields notes the names of his sources in the text there are no page references or footnotes. I find that inexcusable and irresponsible.
2. Fields makes several clear mistakes and self-contradictions. I'm glad I bought the book used as the previous reader marked several errors (mostly regarding dates) that I might otherwise have missed, but there are also the really obvious ones, like when Fields gives different dates for the coronation on facing pages (124-125). While none of the errors impact the validity of his arguments, they make me doubt his fact checking in general. A man who so often criticizes other historians' mistakes should be wary of becoming the pot that calls the kettle black.
4. Fields spends much of the book attacking Alison Weir. Since her book is next on my list I found the contrasts helpful, but I imagine it would be annoying for most readers who would rather just hear his views without so much snide antagonism.
5. Are all history books this repetitive, or is it just because Fields as a lawyer is used to repeating points in order to hammer them into jurors heads? Not having a good memory for historical names and dates I initially found the repetition helpful, but by the time I reached his "Summing Up" chapter I had to laugh as the previous three or four chapters had been dominated by summaries of points or whole paragraphs that I had already read.
6. I'm not sure what to make of his "What If" chapter. Apparently if Richard had let young Edward rule we would have escaped WWI and WWII? Interesting speculation no doubt, but I still find it a strange way to conclude.
So "Summing Up," I approve of the concept, the structure, and the writing style, but _Royal Blood_ lacks the necessary fact-checking and polish that would have made it a strong research source. (less)

2 likes · like · see review

May 13, 2013 Melissa DeHart rated it 4 of 5 stars

I read this book as part of a study I am doing on the Princes in the Tower. This book a viewpoint that I had never read. I have always believed in Richard III's guilt but Bertram Fields offers other suspects and other theories. He doesn't (like other authors) say that Richard is guilty or innocent but gives you an alternative view. I thoroughly enjoyed this bit of history. I am not convinced in Richard's guilt or innocence but this book did get me thinking.

like · see review

May 11, 2009 Misfit rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Ricardians

A very interesting concept, an attorney preparing a defense of Richard III and seeing the mystery of "who done them in" from his point of view. Fields takes the reader through the history of the Wars of the Roses, Edward IV, Richard III and those hated Woodvilles as he analyses the pros and cons of the histories written by the contemporaries, along with those during the reign of Henry VII.

There's enough detail on the book from other reviewers that I needn't rehash it again. I found Field's argu...more

3 likes · like · see review

Dec 30, 2008 Patricia rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Pat Fitzpatrick, Becky Daroff

Shelves: history

This is a refreshing new look at the whole Princes in the Tower mystery by an American lawyer. Fields did not grow up learning about this in England, with the inherent bias that seems to ensue. He approached the case by researching what facts there are and the characters involved and comes up with a theory that to me anyway is extremely plausible. I'd be very interested to hear other's opinions of this book!

like · see review

Mar 27, 2012 XR rated it 4 of 5 stars

Ricard III, el malvat oficial de la història d’Anglaterra, era un perfecte cavaller, no va matar els seus nebots i no era geperut ni deforme. Una lectura fascinant.
Millor part: l'anàlisi dels quadres representant Ricard III de l'epoca Tudor demostra que es tracta de modificacions fetes sota el nou règim, pura propaganda política.

like · see review

Aug 13, 2011 Michele Kallio rated it 5 of 5 stars

An excellent study of the conflicting legends concerning the fate of the Princes in the Tower. Fields uses the skills he has gained in his twenty plus years as a lawyer to evaluate both sides of the question. It is a comprehensive and meticulously researched book sifting through five hundred years of legend. Skillfully argued and reads like a novel.

like · see review

Apr 25, 2013 Cookie rated it 2 of 5 stars

Had a hard time getting through this one.

like · see review

Nov 04, 2011 Taylor Kniphfer rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history

One of the best books I've ever read on Richard III and the Princes in the Tower-and it was written by a lawyer.

like · see review

Mar 19, 2011 Bettie rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: nonfiction, history, published-1998, medieval5c-16c

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

like · see review

Jan 01, 2012 Kara rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Thought provoking look at the mystery of the princes in the tower and their Uncle Richards involvement. Written by a lawyer and looked at from a modern judicial perspective. Wonderful what ifs at the end.

like · see review

Oct 19, 2008 Brittany rated it 2 of 5 stars

Good idea, but the author was too busy ragging on others' ideas about the "mystery" to give good evidence for his theory

1 like · like · see review

Aug 12, 2008 Jenn rated it 2 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Ricardians, Yorkists, and people interested in the Mystery of the Princes

Shelves: medieval-england

That footnotes do matter and I'd like to see more references.

1 like · like · see review

Dec 23, 2010 Laura rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Susanna, Bettie

Recommended to Laura by: Patricia

Shelves: richard-iii, history, read-2010

Excellent research work performed by Fields.

like · see review

May 22, 2013 Melissa rated it 3 of 5 stars

May 22, 2013 Chris Cheramie marked it as to-read

title link	preview: Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes
avg rating	preview: Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes Goodreads rating: 3.82 (276 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/414479.Royal_Blood?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1174531678l/414479.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/414479.Royal_Blood?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes by Bertram Fields[/url]

Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (4)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Bertram Fields

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Royal Blood: Rich...

Royal Blood: Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combineOther Editions (4)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Bertram Fields

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Royal Blood: Rich...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (4)