As 2016 ended, I came across a list of historians and books they recommended for the year. Two of the historians named this book as one of the best. Naturally, I had to see why.
This book was billed as a “dispassionate” biography of Richard III. Horspool is the history editor of the “Times Literary Supplement” and has written several other history related books. I agree this biography is fair and even handed in its assessment of Richard’s character. Like Paul Murray Kendall’s book, Horspool begins with Richard III’s childhood and ends with his death. He has the advantage of knowing of the discovery of Richard’s bones.
In addition to recounting Richard’s life, Horspool goes into detail about the background of his family. He talks a lot about the politics of the Wars of the Roses era and many of the major players. Most importantly, Horspool scrutinizes Richard’s reputation. He goes into the ostensible Tudor propaganda and Shakespeare’s influence. There is some good information on Laurence Olivier’s interpretation of Richard in film and other historian’s writings.
Horspool is especially interested in the Richard III Society and discusses the society’s history and workings. He attended several meetings and his interpretation of the society is most interesting. He basically says the Society is fighting an uphill battle. He states that whether Richard was a bad man or not, he was a bad king and brought about not only his own destruction but that of his dynasty. His record of failure is hard to overturn. This book is very readable, open-minded, objective and impartial and I recommend it.