Customer Reviews

Richard the Third

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I have read every biography and reference source about Richard III, and Kendall's biography still stands as the best introduction to a study of this monarch and his times, and to the controversy which still, despite all the recent scholarship, surrounds him. Kendall is often criticised for his romanticised approach to his subject and for his slightly purple prose, but his book is intensely readable, clear, and scholarly. Later research ahs produced evidence which outdates some of Kendall's points, but his overview of the era and characters continues to be the best. If you're new to the period/subject, or want to get someone else interested, kendall's "Richard III" is the best starting point. I find it an invaluable research tool. Kendall's "The Yorkist Age" is also the best book I have ever found for an understanding of the era. Sources like the Richard III Society website will guide any interested reader to many other reputable sources, but Kendall stands out as the place to start. (And, unlike many writers who claim to be historians, Kendall uses historical sources, not prejudices and second-hand information.) Highly recommended.

This book is one of the few that succeeds in revising the historical profile of king Richard by giving him the place he deserves. For centuries Tudor historians, particularly More and Vergil (using all the heavy artillery of political propaganda on behalf of their masters the Tudor kings) had drawn a caricature of king Richard, making him a monster, the incarnation of evil, not to speak of Shakespeare's play, as brilliant as false. This book proves that king Richard was a wise ruler, an excellent warrior (he decisively contributes to the final Yorkist victory over the Lancastrians in the battles of Barnet and Tewksbury in 1471), loyal to his brother king Edward IV, tender to his wife, loved by the people (specially by Northerners, by the people of York, where he was almost adored, while Henry VII and Henry VIII, the first Tudor kings, were much hated, which explains the constant rebellions of Yorkshire under Tudor rule) The tragedy of king Richard III has nothing to do with Shakespearean plot; it is very unlikely that he ordered the death of Edward IV's sons (the book provides an interesting appendix on the matter) and, of course, he had no body deformity. His tragedy was both personal and political: a man who saw the death of his beloved wife, son and brothers, a king who tried to rule for the people against the barons and paid a terrible price, the price of being betrayed at Bosworth field in 1485; a ruler who tried to take control of the political turmoil, hopelessly, as he found himself trapped in the turmoil, overwhelmed and finally swept away. However, he set the foundations of modern Britain, creating a strong State by undermining the territorial rebellious powers of the old feudal peerage, which were the cancer that had consumed the nation since the Beauforts had made a puppet of Henry VI, the last Lancastrian king, and which degenerated into the open enmity between the dukes of Somerset and York and the subsequent civil strife. Apart from reading a fascinating period of the History of England, this book made me seriously think of how easy it is to falsify History. Richard III is somebody who definitely deserved rehabilitation. Well done, Paul!

Paul Murray Kendall's work on Richard III is considered by most historians as the standard for Ricardian scholarship. By "Ricardian" I mean pro-Richard, as opposed to "traditionalist," which characterizes those historians, such as Charles Ross, who support the theory that Richard III murdered his nephews, the princes in the Tower. Kendall's treatment of Richard III, in contrast to Ross's, is more like a historical novel than a work of dry historical prose. For those interested in the story of Richard III's life without all the minutiae, Kendall's biography is the place to being. Anyone wishing to research more deeply the reign and policies of Richard III should consult the biography by Charles Ross. And those who like Kendall's work but desire a more literary treatment should read Sharon Kay Penman's novel about Richard III, entitled 'The Sunne in Splendour,' which is loosely based on Kendall's biography.

It seems that you can find two camps comcerning Richard III - people who think that he was truly the deforemed monster portrayed by Shakespeare or those who think that he ought to be canonized. Paul Murray Kendall did an excellent job of rendering a portrait of King Richard III that does not revolve around the typical Tudor propoganda and at the same time doesn't clamour for sainthood to be bestowed upon him. Anyone who is looking for a relatively unbiased view of this misunderstood monarch should definitely look into this excellent source!

This is a very readable biography of Richard III. While more recent research may have overtaken some of Mr Kendall's conclusions it by no means diminishes his scholarship.

Richard III's life has been the subject of many works of historical fiction. Additionally, he appears in the works of Shakespeare, is dissected by Sir Thomas More and others writing during Tudor times. Variously lionized and demonized, he is considered by many to be either the tragic hero slain in battle at Bosworth Field or the murderer of the princes in the Tower of London.

To see Richard solely as either a villain or a victim is to ignore the realities of the period in which he lived and the circumstances whereby he came to the throne.

I recommend this biography to those who want to know more about the life and reign of Richard III or are seeking some historical background to some of the works of historical fiction in which he features.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith

I loved this book! Kendall has you believing that you arereading a novel - not history. It is so nice to read a book onRichard III that cites Richard's near contemporary sources as well as those written as Tudor propaganda, not just Thomas More. Kendall fairly deals with all the issues and comes up with a few suggestions of his own. It is nice to see a more balanced history instead of one that blindly follows "The Gospel According to More" (Rowse, Seward, Weir).

I am no expert on medieval England, I simply find it as a hobby to read about it now and again. That said, I must say that I found this book very well written. It tells not only the story of Richard, but a fairly good description of the War of the Roses. I found this book very informitive about his life, and it tells it in a very readable way, sometimes it is as if you are reading a novel, not history, such is Kendall's skill at telling stories. It brings a fresh new perspective to the life of Richard, discarding all the Tudor propaganda.
It makes Richard out to be a real person, not the monster that the Tudors made him out to be. It even contains an excellent essay about who murdered the Princes,it does not discard Richard as a suspect, but also explains how others could have done it.
My one complaint, however, is that at some points, particularly in the middle, it can get a bit boring, and it is sometimes hard to keep all the names strait. But over all I must give this book a very good rating for keeping my attention with the vivid battle discriptions, while still informing me about the world and life,of Richard III

You have to forgive Mr. Kendall his dilligent and thorough exposition at times. Once you do, you'll be amazed by this story of Richard III. A complex era, to be sure, and Kendall's Richard seems at times ruthless, at other times an amazingly disciplined and loyal member of his society--a sort of Heracles figure on occassion. I read this book straight through, no stops. Only Shelby Foote has come as close for me in terms of readability.

Personally speaking, I thought this was a well written and well researched biography that must be on mandatory reading list for anyone intersting in the life and time of King Richard III. However, it should be noted that the author proves to be very sympathic in nature toward Richard and although he does his best to clear all the Shakespearean myths about Richard, it could be said that he probably went too far in some cases in creating a Richard that may be too good. In one case, the case of the missing and presumably murdered Princes in the Tower, Kendall does go all out to proves Richard's innoence. I can lived with that but Kendall failed to realized why so many believed that Richard had a hand in it. Why? Well....the Princes disappeared as he took power and never seen again after he did. Sure, Henry Tudor could have done it and host of many, but like Edward II, Richard II and Henry VI, these princes were rightly considered as the direct threat to reigning ruler's throne which was bit shaky to begin with. Their termination would be logical, necessary and poltically acute - even in our time period. I think Kendall was one of the movers of the Richard the Innocent Man concept regarding the Princes' murders. Many books have been written to back him up or to condemn him. Just for that, the book needs to be read and enjoyed. Kendall proves to be an excellent writer, good historian and got a sense of justice even if you don't agreed.

Since I'm Paul Murray Kendall's daughter, and since I wrote the introduction to this edition, my predilection for my father's meticulous scholarship and his way of making biography come alive, is obvious. This book, however (my favoritism aside), has corrected a multitude of misconceptions about Richard -- and, though I say it, the book's a good read. I just couldn't help writing this.