Richard the Third

Contents include: PREFACE: PROLOGUE BOOK ONE The Kings Brother Part One Richard, Duke of Gloucester 4 49 60 81 89 107 122 33 142 150 162 181 193 207 218 239 8 RICHARD THE THIRD VI. THE ROAD TO THE THRONE 255 VII. THE CHOICE 267 Part T wo Richard, by Grace of God . . . i. ENGLAND 1483 277 II. THE KINGS PROGRESS 299 III. CONSPIRACY 3 1 2 IV. THE GREAT REBELLION 323 V. SPRING 334 VI. SUMMER 351 VII. CHRISTMAS 365 VIII. MAN AND GOVERNOR 370 IX. CASTLE OF HIS CARE 392 X. INVASION 410 XI. BOS WORTH FIELD 428 EPILOGUE 44J APPENDIX I. WHO MURDERED THE PRINCES 465 APPENDIX ii. RICHARDS REPUTATION 496 NOTES 5 BIBLIOGRAPHY 580 INDEX Illustrations Between pages 304 and 305 Richard III Edward IV Elizabeth Woodville, wife of Edward IV Middleham Castle from the South The Battle of Barnet Henry VI Tewkesbury Abbey Margaret of York Antoine, Bastard of Burgundy Parchment with signatures EDWARDUS QUINTUS etc, The Hall of Crosbys Place, Richards town house in Chelsea The Tower of London York Minster Lady Margaret Beaufort, Mother of Henry VII Thomas, Lord Stanley Henry VII MAPS England endpapers Battle of Barnet I0 g Battle of Tewkesbury no Eve of Bosworth 438 Battle of Bosworth 430 GENEALOGICAL TREE Lancaster and York 9. Preface: RICHARD the Third is perhaps the most polemical figure in the reaches of English history. Ever since the Tudor his torians of the sixteenth century developed their picture of an archvillain, he has been the subject of bitter argument by those attacking or defending this view of him, which Shake speare epitomizes in his popular tragedy Richard the Third. In the course of this long controversy, Richards career has usually been approached as stuff from which to create a case, andhis character has been treated as a cardboard counter, black or white, to be pushed back and forth in the struggles of the Great Debate. Is he a villain or is he not Did he murder the Princes or did he not Does the Tudor tradition present an ac curate likeness, or is it a base slander The books written about Richard have been largely devoted to arguing the answers to these questions. The heats of argument are inimical to the art of biography. In this sense, it can be said that no life of Richard has ever been written. The object of this volume is to attempt such a life. I have sought to portray what manner of man Richard was, what manner of life he led, and something of the times of which he was a part. Moral judgments I have left as far as possible to the reader. I have ignored the Tudor tradition, except in so far as it ap pears to offer bits of reliable evidence, and I have based this biography almost entirely upon source material contemporary with Richards day. Since Richard is so controversial a figure, I have provided in the notes an opportunity for the reader to criticize the con clusions which I have drawn from conflicting or ambiguous testimony. Numbers which are starred refer to notes in which evidence is discussed or additional information is supplied the other numbers refer simply to sources. I have tried to indicate clearly, either in the text or in the notes, what is fact and what is my own conjecture and for con jectures of any importance I have given the reasons or evidence on which they are based. If the events of Richards life and the general shape of his character had been previously established, I would probably have given freer rein to speculation. As it is, I havesought to hew him out of the facts, or as close an ap proach to the facts as I could make. Nevertheless, a biography is a work of interpretation. A suc cession of facts does not create a life or reveal a character. The accuracy of my portrait of Richard depends, in the last analy sis, on the validity of the imaginative judgments that I have drawn from the facts...