Richard III: The Maligned King: The Maligned King

If I had to summarize this book in one word, it would be provocative. From the opening chapter where Annette Carson analyzes Richard Collins's theory that Edward IV may have died of poisoning, to the closing chapter depicting Richard's personal tragedies--son dies suddenly and wife dies after a long illness--and how they affected his security, to his miscalculations of how to manage the powerful lords upon whose support he depended, we not only learn how history has maligned this medieval monarch, but also how certain key events have several valid interpretations.

The chapters are arranged chronologically, starting just before Edward IV's death to Richard's defeat and death on Bosworth Field--a period extending just under two and a half years--and of the Tudor aftermath where Richard's good name was maligned. While Carson clearly sides with the "good king Richard" view, she does not ignore detracting theories for each point she examines. Throughout all the tumultuous events of this short historical span, Carson analyzes the primary (where available) and secondary sources--sometimes supporting and sometimes contradicting the conclusions that are drawn. Notably she doesn't shirk from citing and examining controversial references such as that of Thomas More's 'History of King Richard III'.

Carson's work is well balanced, logical, and witty. I believe this text is readily understandable by someone just embarking on learning about this era as well as an important addition to the more knowledgeable reader. The selected bibliography lists over a hundred references that she cites throughout the text. Despite the weight of the research, the book is highly readable and accessible to the non-historian.

The one issue I had with this book has to do with its physical production and not the contents. For this, I lay the responsibility squarely on the publisher--The History Press. I found the tiny font size they chose for this book a real challenge for me to read. I measured it and the regular text is a six-point font size with quoted text even smaller. Admittedly, I am of an age where I need to use reading glasses for normal print size. Here, I often found myself using a magnifying glass in addition to the glasses. I implore The History Press to use at least a ten-point font size if they reprint this book. I'll purchase another copy if they do.

In the spirit of full disclosure, the author and I traded books when we met for the first and only time last August. Neither of us had any expectations of receiving or giving a review. I am writing this review because I think this book is a valuable addition for anyone interested in Richard III and that period of history.

To anyone with an inquiring mind and an interest in history, I strongly recommend this book.
King Richard III remains one of the most fascinating and mysterious of figures, and the widely contradictory opinions regarding his life and character are well worth study even after the 500 years since his death. But many who are interested do not know the facts, and frankly do not have the time to delve into ancient documentation themselves. This would be the ideal reading for anyone in that situation as it covers those most controversial of mysteries, clearly explains what is known, and offers conclusions based strictly on expert research.
This is an extremely well written book on the subject, expressive and always absorbing, with a brilliant collection of illustrations, many quite unique.
It does not cover Richard's whole life however, concentrating instead on the years after Edward IV's death, and covering Richard III's reign from his inheritance of the throne through to Henry VII's coronation. For all matters of controversy during that time period, and there are many since these are the years which Tudor propaganda later distorted the most, this book offers considerable insight. Miss Carson gives us an amazingly clear summary of everything that is known and relevant to the man, his kingship, and his accusers. Such a concise and yet comprehensive coverage concentrating on those most important events, has never previously, to my knowledge, been published.
The author is unashamedly pro-Ricardian, but at no time does this lead to misleading supposition and presents no conclusion without supporting every single point with meticulous and detailed research. Therefore the evidence she offers is authoritative, impressive and convincing. Right from the beginning I realised that here was a book to treasure. Because it has a wider scope than some others, it is, without doubt, the most important book on the subject to have been published since Kendall's. Above all it is constantly interesting.
Even well respected historians and writers of English medieval non-fiction who publicize themselves as experts, then present works of bias, supposition and inaccuracies, leaning mainly on other previously published works, thus repeating what are little more than the whispers of say-so and rumour which have been passed down the ages and are still actually accepted by many who should know better. Almost all such books have proved to be sad disappointments.
This author, on the other hand, takes nothing for granted and consistently questions, delves, and explores for the absolute truth. Indeed, the standard of research followed here is absolutely exemplary
This is not a book easily put down. Miss Carson's style flows smoothly, leading the reader through the difficulties of historical intrigue with clarity and verve. It is thoroughly entertaining, deeply insightful, and for anyone interested in Richard III - whatever their present opinion or bias - this is an absolute must-read. I recommend it most highly.

After all the ostensibly neutral but actually hostile books and articles written on Richard III in recent years, it's refreshing to find one that looks at the events themselves from the standpoint of chronology rather than viewing actions, especially Richard's, in hindsight with the assumption that he intended from the time of his brother's death (or earlier, according to Michael Hicks) to "usurp" the throne. Annette Carson examines not only the events of most concern to Ricardians (Stony Stratford, the execution of Hastings, Richard's assumption of the crown and election by the three estates, the disappearance of the so-called Princes in the Tower, etc.), she also examines ideas generally scorned or ignored by historians, such as the possibility that Edward IV was poisoned by the Woodvilles (buttressed by an examination of Anthony Woodville's actions before Edward's death) and the charges of witchcraft in Titulus Regius, noting that we need to see these charges as they would have been viewed at the time and not from a modern--or even a Tudor--perspective. She argues persuasively that historians should pay more attention to Perkin Warbeck (and to Richard III's sister Margaret). Most important, she regards Sir Thomas More's "history" as it ought to be regarded--as a work of fiction. While I don't agree with all her arguments and conclusions, I think that many of them, particularly regarding Hastings as a conspirator, Titulus Regius, and the fate of Edward IV's sons--present fresh perspectives that need to be considered, especially by such historians as Michael Hicks and A. J. Pollard who believe that they see Richard clearly and objectively. All in all, this book should open new areas of discussion and persuade readers that Charles Ross's biography of Richard (which Carson treats with due respect but is not afraid to question) is perhaps not, after all, definitive.

It has taken me over two years to write a review for Ms Carson's singular achievement examining the life and reputation of Richard III. Every time I thought I was ready to tackle this one I hesitated, feeling inadequate to the task. It hasn't helped that I have re-read my copy so many times that there is virtually nothing left to highlight; how many books can you say that about? I am a cross-checker, I hunt down references to their source, I keep parallel notes on issues and their respective authors, and always at my back is this terse, pithy, no-nonsense expose on how real research should be done.

Readers new and veteran to the Ricardian controversy may find Carson's approach to the substance of his career and reputation too startling to absorb it all, much less on a first read. She has no patience for fools and summarily rejects so much of the status quo concerning Richard that I would suggest that whatever else you are reading about him, or the Wars of the Roses, or anything Tudor, THIS is the one to go back to and compare, to test against. She does have a wonderful if understated sense of humour, and where injected it is appreciated. She forms a comraderie with her reader that becomes in time, a shared burden, to uncover the truth, that makes this very personal for the reader, not simply dry arguments and rebuttals.

I put Carson among the latest generation of strident scholars and writers who are intent on not just reassessing the life of Richard, but also reassessing the premises that for too long have closed off discussion, or belittled and marginalized those who question, and who put the WoTR and the Tudors to the same scrutiny once reserved only for Richard.

Traditional academia has made a mess of the WoTR (and certainly Richard's life) and an unwary reader might close their books in frustration, they pick up on too many red flags that none of the "professionals" want to deal with - when, instead, they just need to search out the authors like Carson who have the integrity to wipe the slate clean and start all over again, to begin afresh. She may be leading the cavalry charge under a Ricardian standard but the war she is fighting is for accountability and fair play in what we read as "history" - anyone's history.

I would never deny that Richard has been a controversial figure, what I object to is that historians, biographers, academics et al are seemingly blind, willfully or innocently, to the equally controversial conduct and motivations of (for just two examples) Margaret Beaufort and John Morton, the two architects of Tudor's usurpation and achieved through the betrayal of Lord Stanley and his brother William, not on moral grounds, but pure, naked self-interest. Under a Tudor the subversive actions of a Margaret Beaufort and Morton would have been handled quite differently, both beheaded, no safety net would have been extended to them because they were female or clergy. (BTW, the professionals might like to start with Edward of Warwick, a controversy of epic proportions, and far beyond the historical dilemma of his murder. He is key to so many allegedly "resolved" issues for both Richard and Tudor).

Keep Carson's Maligned King on hand, use it liberally, refer often to the various topics, issues, points of conflict, the sources, found in these chapters and stay the course, books like this one are here to reopen the case, re-examine the evidence (both accurate and manipulated), and finally interrogate the "witnesses" (also real or manipulated) - she is in a class of her own, do not expect a traditional "biography" nor collection of pretty essays retreading the same old lines that have been allowed to pass for substance for too long.

And while I may sound angry or petulant, I assure you that Carson is neither, she has the grace and clear-headed thinking that is needed, and a fine backbone!

Purchased this book after seeing the author on youtube. In that video she did not plug this book but rather gave a very convincing "Ricardian" argument for his character and reign. I very much appreciate that this book already had been updated following the finding of Richard's body - another very pleasant surprise.

All in all a very tantalizing historical book, as author she definately comes in the pro-Richard camp in which I also dwell. I would have given this book a solid 5 stars except I had trouble with her strident argument for the poisoning of Edward IV. Now he may well have been poisoned, I wasn't there so of course I don't know BUT I found disturbing how quickly and easily she dismissed the idea that he could have died of natural causes.

How can one die of a "fever" as Edward did? Yes he was healthy, active and had recently been hunting or boating outdoors. He was reletively young and there were no known injuries or chronic illnesses. No KNOWN chronic illnesses that is. It was known he had become obese, he drank alot and slept around. Heavy alcohol consumption and being obese often leads to diabetes which seriously impairs immunity causing one to die of relatively minor illnesses. She also says something shockingly odd, I'm paraphrasing "Edward could not have died of appendicitis because his diet was too good" What? Diet has nothing to do with getting appendicitis. Its also true that no everyone who has appendicitis even has pain in the right lower abdomen - some have back pain, others no pain at all, just a fever which eventually left untreated will lead to death in most cases.

Here is a starting list/differential diagnosis, any of which he could have had and died of rather quickly: typhoid, pneumonia (not everyone with pneumonia coughs), influenza, diverticulitis, scarlet fever which can quickly cause endocarditis or renal failure being quickly lethal. Any infection can lead to sepsis which is most likely the cause of his death. He could also have succumbed to disseminated gonorrhea which starts with UTI symptoms, then spreads to the kidneys and can lead to death - quick. How about encephalitis, meningitis, heck even a tooth abscess, sinus infection or ear infection can spread to the brain and kill you rather quickly. There are ALL sorts of ways young healthy people can die quickly and this is no solid grounds on which to base an entire theory of poisoning.

Ok so...with my rant against her case for Edward IV's poisoning, the rest of the book is an excellent read. No matter whether you have Ricardian leanings or you're a Tudor propaganda zombie - this book is worth a read. Understandable but in no way insulting to the intelligence, entertaining and a great picture section in the middle. I also very much appreciate the frequent inclusions of images of the family tree, the lineage can get confusing so the visual aid is a nice touch.

I purchased this book after watching the TV documentary about finding and verifying the remains of Richard III. I thought this would be more of a biography, but it is primarily an argument eulogizing the king. It did leave me with a more favorabile opinion, but I would have preferred something closer to a comprehensive biography. Instead, the author reviews and contests the negative assessments of the man. The book is reasonably well-written and researched, but I am now looking for a different study on the life and times of Richard III.

What a splendid review of the historical facts and fictions surrounding this much maligned King. The novels of this genre ("Daughter of Time" and "Sunne in Spelndour" for example) do admirable jobs too, but it takes a careful, detailed analysis to really get into the "meat of the matter" of this fascinating injustice. Carson lays out the historical record, including sources antagonistic to Richard's reign, and meticulously examines each theme. She aptly handles the question of Edward IV's dual marriage and the resulting illegitimacy of his offspring with Elizabeth Woodville; the disappearance of the Princes in the Tower; Richard's almost naive trust in others that led to his ultimate doom (e.g., in Stanley at Bosworth); the complicity of forces beyond his control in England, Wales, Scotland, France, and Brittany; and the most personal side of the main players.

There would be only two "cons" that come to mind. One is the very small typeface, at least to my eyes; I wish this were available on Kindle for that reason. The other is that parts can get rather pedantic at times but after all, it isn't a novel and you do want details.

Recently archeologists believe they may have found Richard III's grave and a cursory examination of the bones dispels the Tudor propaganda about his deformities (if DNA does establish these are Richard's bones!). This makes reading historical books such as this and Kendall's even more relevant today than ever.

First, in the interest of full disclosure, I must admit to being a proud Richardian. I always suspected he had bee given a raw deal by historians and the public in general. When I was in college, I took a course in the history of the period covering the reigns of Henry VII of England, Louis XI of France and Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. I remember discussing my feelings about Richard III with my professor, although, at the time those feelings were unsubstantiated by facts. He advised me to read Josephine Tey's "Daughter of Time." Though a work of fiction, Ms. Tey's novel did cite a number of historical documents that contradicted what might be termed "Popular Wisdom" regarding Richard.
Now, lo these many years later, I have had the opportunity to read Annette Carson's masterful book. One of the most fascinating segments of the book was that concerning what happened to the so-called Princes in the Tower. For me, their disappearance sometime after the summer of 1483 was the most troubling, if circumstantial evidence AGAINST Richard. In her book, Ms. Carson posits a very plausible, though speculative theory about what might have happened to the boys. Without providing a spoiler for potential readers, I will say that her theory does relate to the later appearance on the scene of the man known to history as Perkin Warbeck.
All in all, this is a wonderful book, lucid, intriguing and well researched. Those firmly convinced that Richard was, indeed, the monster of Polydore Vergil, Thomas More and William Shakespeare may balk, but even they should give this book a try. Highly recommended!

I loved this book. I think I'm becoming a Ricardian more and more. What I most enjoyed was the fact the author doesn't just draw solely on her love of Richard. She gives him fair play and is willing to be forthright when she thinks Richard has done something wrong or handled something wrong. She's quite willing to use both pro-Richard and anti-Richard sources to make her point and draws extensively from first-hand sources analyzing them thoroughly. A wonderful read and highly recommended.

Ms. Carson is clearly on the side of King Richard, and her conclusions sometimes show that bias although she is trying very hard to do an objective study. Alas, the problem with history is that any writer begins with or develops a personal bias regarding his/her subject that often affects the research. Having read a great deal of historical "information" from those who believe Richard was an evil usurper, I really enjoy seeing the facts presented from a different perspective. I think we may never know the real truth about this 500 year old mystery, but Ms. Carson does an excellent job of presenting Richard's case. I would say it is a must-read for those interested in this subject.