As one who didn't know much about Richard III outside of Shakespeare, I found Kendall's book fascinating.

Altho it was first published in the 1950's, it is very well researched and Kendall goes out of his way to present FACTS (with copious notes) and limit conjecture.

I have to say that this is one of the most interesting books I have read in a while. The writing is concise and descriptive without being over-dramatic.

I very much enjoyed this book and would recommend it to anyone interested in English history or even a tourist visiting England.

..the winter of our discontent, made glorious summer by this son of York."
Richard's soliloquy is quite draconian from the beginning and sets the stage for a trgedy only Shakspear can pull off.
This play, focuses on Richard III's Machiavelli pursuits and determination to crop the crown from all who stands in his way- kin, no exception.
He prose is superb, and his timing excellent. He is able to woo lady Anne moments after killing her husband - his brother - and build alliances only to depredate them, for his selfish gains.
Quite stirring, and at the same time quite revulsive.
What better recipe can you want?

Every once in awhile one stumbles upon a real gem. For me, Kendall's "Richard III" is such. I can't believe my good fortune.

According to Harold Bloom, of all the characters Shakespeare created, only Iago in Othello is a greater monster than Richard III. With the recent publication of Brenda James' "The Truth Will Out," I was curious to see why Sir Henry Neville might have portrayed Richard III in such a bad light. I think Kendall provides the answer.

This book is divided into two parts: the first part is the history of Richard before he becomes king; the second part, his two years on the throne.

In addition, there is a wonderful epilogue, a study of what happened to the characters that were still hanging around after Richard was killed and his successor, Henry VII, assumed power. It produced that same effect one feels when a screenwriter tells us what ultimately happened to others in the film.

And just for good measure, there are two wonderful appendices, quite lengthy and just as well researched: an appendix on "who murdered the `Little Princes'? and an appendix on Richard's reputation, the reason I first sought out a biography of Richard III.

The notes are extensive (66 pages) and fun to read; the index is wonderful; and, the bibliography is superb.

This book was first published in 1955; my soft cover copy was printed in 1973. Such staying power suggests this is a very reputable book. I was gratified to see that a reviewer (J.M. Whitford) who has read every biography and reference source on Richard III opines that this is still the best introduction.

In 1955 this old biography of old Richard III was authored by Ohio University Ph.d Paul Murray Kendall. The book is still being published and is, arguably, the best introduction to the life and times of the last Yorkist monarch of England. Anyone interested in Richard III should add this well researched book to his or her shelf.
Richard III was born in 1452. His father the Duke of Gloucester was executed for treason. Richard grew up amid the confusion and tumult of late fifteenth century British life. He was the brother of Edward IV. His father Edward III had been a great warrior king. When Edward IV died in 1483 Richard usurped the throne from the new 12 year old boy King Edward V. Richard hated Edward IV's greedy and power mad widow Elizabeth Woodville and her family. Edward V and his brother the Duke of York were murdered in the Tower of London. No one has proven conclusively who the murderer was. Many historians speculate that it was Richard III who ordered the murders or perhaps the foul deed was done by his henchman the Duke of Buckingham (who later led an unsuccessful revolt against Richard).
Richard was involved in the battle of Barnet along with his brother Edward IV which led to the death of the rebellious Warwick. He also particpated in the Battle of Tewksbury in which the mad King Henry VI
was killed.
Richard was married to Anne Neville who was weak and died prior to his own bloody death. Richard was popular in the North of England and his Council of the North brough orderly government to this volatile region. Richard particpated in battle against the Scotch keeping the English marches relatively well governed.
The greatest challenge to Richard's eighteen month reign as King of England came from Henry Tudor. At Bosworth Field in August, 1485 Richard died in battle against Henry. Henry became Henry VII beginning 119 years of Tudor monarchy. Kendall is critical of Henry VII and says he was a tyrant. This is disputed by many historians while others in the academic community support this contention. Richard III was the last English King to die in battle.
Richard III was no saint. He was a violent man living in a violent age. He died at age 33 and may have become a good king despite his bloody record. Kendall says later Tudor mythology especially in the biographies of Richard III by Sir Thomas Moore and the chronicler Hall have portrayed Richard as a monster who was deformed. This was not true. Neither is the portrait painted of Richard limned by Shakespeare in his history play true to all the facts.
Kendall writes in a dry academic style with countless names. This is confusing for a lay reader unfamiliar with the history and players of the period. He is to be commended for his research. Most helpful were the battle maps especially of Bosworth Field which the author visited in a successful attempt to paint an accurate portrait of the crucial battle.
This book is a fine and famous history of Richard III well worth reading.

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

Paul Murray Kendall writes an objective biography of Richard III from his childhood to his death on Bosworth Field in 1485. He examines contemporary accounts with an emphasis on the reports of Dominic Mancini, who wrote from his own observations. He reviews pro-Richardian or revisionist theories as well as traditionalist viewpoints in an attempt to provide an objective narrative about the king's life.

The book starts with the earliest known information (at about age 10) and continues through Edward IV's reign and into Richard's, ending with his death in 1485. Separate appendices deal with the disappearance of the princes Edward and Richard and Richard's character.

In a nutshell, the author characterizes Richard III as a loyal, honorable, talented (military skills) leader as well as a devoted and religious family man. These strengths, however, were offset by inflexibility - a mind that saw black and white, but nothing in between - and political naivete.

Kendall's analysis of the available information concerning the disappearance of the princes is objective and sensible. His conclusion: Richard probably knew what happened to them. If he sanctioned their deaths, he did so because that's what rulers did to deposed kings in medieval times. The times were cruel and Richard was a man of his times.

Equally objective is Kendall's assessment of Richard's character.

The book is an excellent introduction to the life of a fascinating man as well as the times in which he lived. Highly recommended. FYI, this edition is a reprint of the original work published in 1955.

This unblessèd plot, this unearthly realm, this English king, this twisted man, this teeming den of royal murders, this land of ancient villainy, this land of contradictions, this dear land of the Bard, this dear, dear land of incomparable writing. Who can explain it? Try, not. You need only to harp on this one string: No work of literature even comes close. Richard III is in a class to itself.
No villain was ever more despicable. Cheat. Lie. Murder. Murder, you say! Why, before breakfast, Richard manages to kill two babies and his own new wife, Anne, whom, incidentally he took only yesterday immediately after killing her father and first husband with his own hand. Now that is Baaad with a capital B! No wonder his own mother would declare him Bloody thou art; bloody will be thy end. Shame serves thy life and doth thy death attend.
No villain is more human. Like Shylock, If you prick him, does he not bleed? If you tickle him does he not laugh? If you poison him does he not die? And if you wrong him shall he not revenge? But unlike the wretched merchant, our man Rick has a bloody conscience. O coward conscience, how dost thou afflict me!
No villain is more eloquent. This is our boy wooing Anne: Look how my ring encompassth thy finger; even so thy breast encloseth my heart. Wear both of them, for both are thine. And if thy poor devoted servant may beg one favor at thy gracious hand, thou dost confirm his happiness forever. Now, how are you going to hate a guy who can turn a phrase like that?
Long live the King.

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!

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 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!

I bought this book to help with my a-level history personal study. Out of all the books i have used, this has been the upmost useful. The quotes, references to sources etc help the reader to bind in all the information from the book into a easily readable story. Full of facts whilst interesting. Having use to the appendix was very useful because i needed information about the 'princes in the tower'.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Complete without being boringly detailed, written like a historical novel--in fact, some parts are, as Kendall admits, slightly fictionalized--this bio of Richard was for many years the standard one. The fiction, while reviled by more scholarly authors, does not destroy the worth of the book, however; those parts are obvious and can be easily separated from the rest of the text. Especially valuable are the two appendices--one giving a history of Richard's reputation that in itself destroys many of the charges made against Richard, and the other on The Princes in the Tower, which gives a survey of all sources as well as putting forth modern theories, which Kendall critiques. He also puts forward, for the first time, the suggestion that the Duke of Buckingham might have murdered the Princes in the Tower, building an excellent case but then, apparently fearful of being ridiculed by traditionalists--a perfectly legitimate fear--, Kendall backs off and says, well, it's just a suggestion. This tendency to belittle his own ideas and sometimes be wishy-washy hurts the book, but it remains an essential source on Richard for its thoroughness, its clarity, and its arguments, even if they are only given tentatively. There are too few books sympathetic to Richard; this is one of the best.