What do you think?
Rate this book
The Last Days of Richard III and the fate of his DNA: The Book that Inspired the Dig
The Last Days of Richard III contains a new and uniquely detailed exploration of Richard's last 150 days. By deliberately avoiding the hindsight knowledge that he will lose the Battle of Bosworth Field, we discover a new Richard: no passive victim, awaiting defeat and death, but a king actively pursuing his own agenda. It also re-examines the aftermath of Bosworth: the treatment of Richard's body; his burial; and the construction of his tomb. And there is a fascinating story of why, and how, Richard III's family tree was traced until a relative was found, alive and well, in Canada. Now, with the discovery of Richard's skeleton at the Greyfriars Priory in Leicester, England, John Ashdown-Hill explains how his book inspired the dig and completes Richard III's fascinating story, giving details of how Richard died, and how the DNA link to a living relative of the king allowed the royal body to be identified.
256 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 9, 2010
144 people are currently reading
1116 people want to read
About the author
John Ashdown-Hill
22 books49 followersLouis John Frederick Ashdown-Hill MBE FSA (5 April 1949 – 18 May 2018), commonly known as John Ashdown-Hill, was an independent historian and author of books on late medieval English history with a focus on the House of York and Richard III of England. Ashdown-Hill died 18 May 2018 of motor neurone disease.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews
August 11, 2016
Richard III was King of England for only two years, but the story of his brief reign is a notorious one. His suspected misdeeds, the most disturbing of which is the accusation that he murdered his young nephews in order to usurp the throne, were immortalized by Shakespeare. He lost his crown and his life to Henry Tudor at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. For obvious reasons, there wasn’t much in the way of a ceremonious funeral, and the location of his gravesite was lost to history.
Enter the Richard III Society, a group that works to ”secure a more balanced assessment of the king and to support research into his life and times” in order to “make the case for ‘Good King Richard.’” They think he got a bad rap, slandered by Tudor propagandists trying to bolster the shaky credentials of Richard’s successor, Henry VII. Through historical detective work by members of the Richard III Society and the University of Leicester, Richard’s remains were discovered in 2012 underneath a parking lot in Leicester. He was finally buried again, this time with more ceremony, in March, 2015.
The Last Day of Richard III is advertised as “the book that inspired the dig.” Historian John Ashdown-Hill worked on the project to locate the gravesite. He also found a living relative of Richard’s, a direct female-line descendent of his sister Anne, whose mitochondrial DNA was used to match to the skeleton found in Leicester.
While Ashdown-Hill’s contribution to answering these historical questions cannot be denied, the book itself is not as impressive. It is no surprise that Ashdown-Hill is a passionate Ricardian, but his bias undermines his credibility as a historian. Right out of the gate he refers to Elizabeth of York, Richard’s niece and the future wife of Henry VII, as the “eldest daughter of the late King Edward by his bigamous pretended marriage to Lady Grey.” Any reference to Edward IV’s children includes a snide comment reminding us of their bastard status. What Ashdown-Hill does not get into is that this illegitimacy is far from accepted historically. He takes it for granted as an accepted fact and glosses over it as quickly as possible.
Another odd authorial quirk is Ashdown-Hill’s insistence on using quotation marks every time he uses the name ‘Tudor’. His footnote the first time he does this tersely refers us to another of his books for explanation. If you read Royal Marriage Secrets: Consorts & Concubines, Bigamists & Bastards, you can find out that Ashdown-Hill has a theory that Edmund Tudor was really the son of Edmund Beaufort and, you guessed it, another bastard.
The author just can’t resist the opportunity to get in a little dig, albeit an esoteric one, against Henry VII. The effect for me each of the dozens of times I read ‘Tudor’ was to picture Dr. Evil and his sarcastic air quotes. It was a bit distracting.
Ashdown-Hill excuses minimizing the pesky controversies surrounding Richard’s accession by stating that his focus is a narrow one, covering just the last few months of the king’s life. Fair enough; this is not a long book, so there must be a lot of information to fit in.
Well, yes, but the level of detail is both strangely obsessive and largely speculative. There is a lengthy digression into whether or not Richard would have been a guy who liked to eat breakfast, and if so what he might have liked to eat. We get a similar level of detail about his carriage, tapestries, and bed hangings. Then we have a long list of shirts, doublets, gowns, hoods, shoes, boots, handkerchiefs, and ostrich feathers owned by his brother Edward IV. (The same information isn’t actually available for Richard, but we are assured that he probably had the same kind of stuff.) There is some conjecture about English partridge species then and now. Oh, and Richard “also possessed a library and was therefore presumably interested in reading.”
It is almost a relief to get to the chapters about tracking down a living relative for DNA analysis. Unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA changes little from one generation to the next, so it is useful for historical DNA comparison when hundreds of years have elapsed. But it is only passed from mothers to their children. Finding an unbroken maternal line over something like twenty generations is no small task, especially since women are often lost to genealogy research since they usually took their husband’s surnames. Even here, though, there is a lot of excessive discussion about the lives of all of these people over the generations. If they, like most people, didn’t have the most exciting lives, we learn about some of their other relatives, people who have absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this book.
While there is some good information in this book, the hyper-focused myopia regarding some topics while downplaying the controversial (and more interesting) ones makes it hard to recommend. The biases regarding the subject made me wonder if the superfluous detail was meant to numb us into accepting everything we were told, a case of a writer who doth protest too much.
Enter the Richard III Society, a group that works to ”secure a more balanced assessment of the king and to support research into his life and times” in order to “make the case for ‘Good King Richard.’” They think he got a bad rap, slandered by Tudor propagandists trying to bolster the shaky credentials of Richard’s successor, Henry VII. Through historical detective work by members of the Richard III Society and the University of Leicester, Richard’s remains were discovered in 2012 underneath a parking lot in Leicester. He was finally buried again, this time with more ceremony, in March, 2015.
The Last Day of Richard III is advertised as “the book that inspired the dig.” Historian John Ashdown-Hill worked on the project to locate the gravesite. He also found a living relative of Richard’s, a direct female-line descendent of his sister Anne, whose mitochondrial DNA was used to match to the skeleton found in Leicester.
While Ashdown-Hill’s contribution to answering these historical questions cannot be denied, the book itself is not as impressive. It is no surprise that Ashdown-Hill is a passionate Ricardian, but his bias undermines his credibility as a historian. Right out of the gate he refers to Elizabeth of York, Richard’s niece and the future wife of Henry VII, as the “eldest daughter of the late King Edward by his bigamous pretended marriage to Lady Grey.” Any reference to Edward IV’s children includes a snide comment reminding us of their bastard status. What Ashdown-Hill does not get into is that this illegitimacy is far from accepted historically. He takes it for granted as an accepted fact and glosses over it as quickly as possible.
Another odd authorial quirk is Ashdown-Hill’s insistence on using quotation marks every time he uses the name ‘Tudor’. His footnote the first time he does this tersely refers us to another of his books for explanation. If you read Royal Marriage Secrets: Consorts & Concubines, Bigamists & Bastards, you can find out that Ashdown-Hill has a theory that Edmund Tudor was really the son of Edmund Beaufort and, you guessed it, another bastard.
The author just can’t resist the opportunity to get in a little dig, albeit an esoteric one, against Henry VII. The effect for me each of the dozens of times I read ‘Tudor’ was to picture Dr. Evil and his sarcastic air quotes. It was a bit distracting.
Ashdown-Hill excuses minimizing the pesky controversies surrounding Richard’s accession by stating that his focus is a narrow one, covering just the last few months of the king’s life. Fair enough; this is not a long book, so there must be a lot of information to fit in.
Well, yes, but the level of detail is both strangely obsessive and largely speculative. There is a lengthy digression into whether or not Richard would have been a guy who liked to eat breakfast, and if so what he might have liked to eat. We get a similar level of detail about his carriage, tapestries, and bed hangings. Then we have a long list of shirts, doublets, gowns, hoods, shoes, boots, handkerchiefs, and ostrich feathers owned by his brother Edward IV. (The same information isn’t actually available for Richard, but we are assured that he probably had the same kind of stuff.) There is some conjecture about English partridge species then and now. Oh, and Richard “also possessed a library and was therefore presumably interested in reading.”
It is almost a relief to get to the chapters about tracking down a living relative for DNA analysis. Unlike nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA changes little from one generation to the next, so it is useful for historical DNA comparison when hundreds of years have elapsed. But it is only passed from mothers to their children. Finding an unbroken maternal line over something like twenty generations is no small task, especially since women are often lost to genealogy research since they usually took their husband’s surnames. Even here, though, there is a lot of excessive discussion about the lives of all of these people over the generations. If they, like most people, didn’t have the most exciting lives, we learn about some of their other relatives, people who have absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this book.
While there is some good information in this book, the hyper-focused myopia regarding some topics while downplaying the controversial (and more interesting) ones makes it hard to recommend. The biases regarding the subject made me wonder if the superfluous detail was meant to numb us into accepting everything we were told, a case of a writer who doth protest too much.
June 2, 2013
The idea of looking at the last days of Richard III's life as if the battle of Bosworth's outcome was unknown seems so obvious to me that I'm wondering why it wasn't done before. It's only a literary text that can plant portents and a sense of fatalism in Richard III's story: as this book shows, he expected to win at Bosworth, and he was a man of considerable piety and courage. The version of Richard III shown in Shakespeare's plays (as elsewhere, of course) is a part of the Tudor myth -- no surprise to those who've looked at the history plays in any detail, I think.
Granted, the scope of this book is deliberately limited. Such infamous issues as the 'Princes in the tower' are barely touched upon, and Ashdown-Hill is wholly on the side of Richard III, viewing Henry Tudor's claims as dubious in the extreme. But, to his credit, Ashdown-Hill makes that explicitly clear -- and points out several instances of double standards applied to that period of history by writers both contemporary and modern.
The first section of the book, up to Richard III's death, is the more fascinating to me. Genealogy is not one of my things, and even if I personally were a descendant of someone important -- say, Llywelyn ap Gruffydd or Owain Glyndŵr -- I'd find it difficult to be interested in the exact doings of all the unbroken line from that person to me. So the chapter tracing the female line of Richard's family was one I skimmed -- though I was fascinated to know that it was done and that the mitochondrial DNA survived for comparison with the body now known to be Richard III's.
The success of the search for Richard's body and the comparison with a living descendent speaks very well of Ashdown-Hill's meticulous and accurate research.
Granted, the scope of this book is deliberately limited. Such infamous issues as the 'Princes in the tower' are barely touched upon, and Ashdown-Hill is wholly on the side of Richard III, viewing Henry Tudor's claims as dubious in the extreme. But, to his credit, Ashdown-Hill makes that explicitly clear -- and points out several instances of double standards applied to that period of history by writers both contemporary and modern.
The first section of the book, up to Richard III's death, is the more fascinating to me. Genealogy is not one of my things, and even if I personally were a descendant of someone important -- say, Llywelyn ap Gruffydd or Owain Glyndŵr -- I'd find it difficult to be interested in the exact doings of all the unbroken line from that person to me. So the chapter tracing the female line of Richard's family was one I skimmed -- though I was fascinated to know that it was done and that the mitochondrial DNA survived for comparison with the body now known to be Richard III's.
The success of the search for Richard's body and the comparison with a living descendent speaks very well of Ashdown-Hill's meticulous and accurate research.
February 5, 2011
An interesting account of the last few months of the life and reign of Richard III. John Ashdown-Hill makes the important point that although this time is generally regarded as unimportant except as the lead up to the battle of Bosworth, King Richard did not know he would be killed. Although Henry Tudor was a threat, he probably didn't see him as a huge threat - more of a minor irritation. Richard expected to defeat him and spent these months busily planning the rest of his life and his reign. New legislations were brought before parliament. The prospect of marrying again was being discussed. For Richard this time was filled with possibilities and new beginnings, and this book takes a fresh look at what occurred.
January 2, 2012
This is only a fairly short book with a limited focus, but nevertheless I found it very interesting. It's odd really, because opinion on the subject tends to be so polarised that it's easy to lose sight of a few simple facts and some of what Ashdown-Hill presents here should really be so obvious! For starters, for all the association of Bosworth with Richard III he didn't know it was going to happen and obviously didn't go in 'knowing' that he was going to be defeated - hindsight may be a great thing, but not if you want to look at historical events in context!
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
March 25, 2013
I have just started reading the Kindle edition of The Last Days of Richard III and the fate of his DNA by John Ashdown-Hill. I don't often recommend a book until I finish it--but this is a must read. John has a lovely sense of humor and a dry style, but I'm finding this book a page turner, nonetheless.
In the case of books published by The History Press (THP), I find the ebooks preferable to the print if for no other reason than THP uses really small type face, especially in their paperbacks. Another advantage is that I can copy bits from the text (through the Kindle app on my PC) and paste it into the email as I did here. It even gives me the citation info that I'd need for a paper.
In August of 2012 a team of archaeologists from the University of Leicester went digging in a social services parking lot with the idea of hopefully finding evidence of the Grey Friars Friary. Not only did they locate the friary, they found Richard III’s remains.
In 2003, before the dig was ever considered, John Ashdown-Hill started his investigation of finding a living descendent from the female line of Richard’s mother, Cecily Neville. The female line of descent is necessary because children inherit an exact copy of their mother’s mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), but only the female passes this copy to the next generation. The author describes the process of finding a living descendent of one of Richard’s sisters and of the mtDNA analysis. The mtDNA was now available for comparison to the remains’ mtDNA. As exciting as this information is (for me), this is the present day science. This book is so much more.
Ashdown-Hill paints a fresh picture of a man, who despite terrible personal tragedies—his only legitimate son had died suddenly in April of 1484 and less than a year later, his wife died after a long illness (probably tuberculosis)—looking forward to remarrying and producing an heir and to a long reign as England’s king. Although there can be no doubt that Richard genuinely grieved for his son and wife, he nevertheless was planning for the future. This refreshing image is different from what most historians and novelists have portrayed.
The reader also gets a sense of what daily life was like for Richard, what some of his duties were, and how he would execute them.
I found this book to be rich in detail and informative about Richard III’s last 150 or so days and about the role of DNA in confirming the remains. Not only is “Last Days” a significant historical reference, I found it a delight to read. John Ashdown-Hill achieved what is rarely seen in such a scholarly work—a reference that can be read from beginning to end without compromising the facts. I can’t recommend this book enough.
This is a shortened version of the review first published 3/14/2013 on my blog, Random Thoughts of an Accidental Author. © 2013 Joan Szechtman
In the case of books published by The History Press (THP), I find the ebooks preferable to the print if for no other reason than THP uses really small type face, especially in their paperbacks. Another advantage is that I can copy bits from the text (through the Kindle app on my PC) and paste it into the email as I did here. It even gives me the citation info that I'd need for a paper.
In August of 2012 a team of archaeologists from the University of Leicester went digging in a social services parking lot with the idea of hopefully finding evidence of the Grey Friars Friary. Not only did they locate the friary, they found Richard III’s remains.
In 2003, before the dig was ever considered, John Ashdown-Hill started his investigation of finding a living descendent from the female line of Richard’s mother, Cecily Neville. The female line of descent is necessary because children inherit an exact copy of their mother’s mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), but only the female passes this copy to the next generation. The author describes the process of finding a living descendent of one of Richard’s sisters and of the mtDNA analysis. The mtDNA was now available for comparison to the remains’ mtDNA. As exciting as this information is (for me), this is the present day science. This book is so much more.
Ashdown-Hill paints a fresh picture of a man, who despite terrible personal tragedies—his only legitimate son had died suddenly in April of 1484 and less than a year later, his wife died after a long illness (probably tuberculosis)—looking forward to remarrying and producing an heir and to a long reign as England’s king. Although there can be no doubt that Richard genuinely grieved for his son and wife, he nevertheless was planning for the future. This refreshing image is different from what most historians and novelists have portrayed.
The reader also gets a sense of what daily life was like for Richard, what some of his duties were, and how he would execute them.
I found this book to be rich in detail and informative about Richard III’s last 150 or so days and about the role of DNA in confirming the remains. Not only is “Last Days” a significant historical reference, I found it a delight to read. John Ashdown-Hill achieved what is rarely seen in such a scholarly work—a reference that can be read from beginning to end without compromising the facts. I can’t recommend this book enough.
This is a shortened version of the review first published 3/14/2013 on my blog, Random Thoughts of an Accidental Author. © 2013 Joan Szechtman
July 12, 2013
I have long followed the historical arguments surrounding the life, reign and death of Richard III. I have always felt very uneasy that a, seemingly, competent soldier, pious and generous young prince, and devoted brother could have so changed, on the death of said brother, and turn into the monster portrayed by Shakespeare. So many of the elements of his story, as left to us, have never added up to a whole - there is a huge gap in the extant records which will probably never be filled.
John Ashdown-Hill's book is an attempt to help bridge that gap, but, in the main, whilst his research and work on the mitochondrial DNA sequencing proved beyond doubt what happened to Richard's corpse ( as the remains found in Leicester have been proved to be his), I still don't feel that gap is anywhere near being closed.
I enjoyed reading this book - the fascinating work on mtDNA held me spellbound - but I feel that the author was clutching at any straws that blew in the wind to discredit the 'Tudor' version which has been handed down to us, and about which I still feel uneasy. That some of the accepted stories have proven to be false is helpful, but one story has been proven to be true (the slight deformity caused by scoliosis) even though undoubtedly over exaggerated.
The jury is still out then - and will probably remain so. The enigma that surrounds Richard III's reign lives on.
John Ashdown-Hill's book is an attempt to help bridge that gap, but, in the main, whilst his research and work on the mitochondrial DNA sequencing proved beyond doubt what happened to Richard's corpse ( as the remains found in Leicester have been proved to be his), I still don't feel that gap is anywhere near being closed.
I enjoyed reading this book - the fascinating work on mtDNA held me spellbound - but I feel that the author was clutching at any straws that blew in the wind to discredit the 'Tudor' version which has been handed down to us, and about which I still feel uneasy. That some of the accepted stories have proven to be false is helpful, but one story has been proven to be true (the slight deformity caused by scoliosis) even though undoubtedly over exaggerated.
The jury is still out then - and will probably remain so. The enigma that surrounds Richard III's reign lives on.
January 20, 2012
John Ashdown-Hill is a historian and member of the Royal Historical Society and the Richard III society. With several non-fiction books already to his credit, he brings close attention to bear upon the last eight months of the King’s life. As a Ricardian since my '60's teens, I felt the author’s insights as important as his research . For instance, we know how the king’s story ends, but it’s wrong to let that knowledge color how we imagine his last months. We are given permission to “forget Bosworth,” and that leaves us free to see a man of action deeply involved in life and in his plans for England’s future. There are chapters about the king’s death, about his last battle and the aftermath, about his re-burial and grave, and about the fate of his family under Tudor rule. A section about recent mtDNA research performed by the author is a human interest piece, tracing fugitive Plantagenet material through 15 generations. The Last Days of Richard III should prove of interest to anyone who wants to go deeper into this watershed moment in English History.
(Review first published in magazine of The Historical Novel Society)
(Review first published in magazine of The Historical Novel Society)
October 12, 2012
The Last Days + Burial + DNA Research Regarding, April 19, 2011
This book is all three of the above. The last days parts cover the events, the daily life and the political situation of Richard III at the end of his life. A third of the text covers the burial, aftermath and a discussion of DNA.
There is an analysis of the disputed theories regarding the night before the Battle of Bosworth, Richard III's Burial, Henry Tudor's claim to the throne and other issues. There is a lot of ready reference in the text, the notes and appendices.
I'm glad the publisher sacrificed black and white for color, so there are many more pictures than you'd expect for a volume of this size.
The discussion of DNA at the end was interesting as was the discussion of the descendents of the York line.
The author has a readable style and makes the material accessible to the general reader. Those who are knowledgeable about Richard III may want to have this in their libraries for its reference value.
This book is all three of the above. The last days parts cover the events, the daily life and the political situation of Richard III at the end of his life. A third of the text covers the burial, aftermath and a discussion of DNA.
There is an analysis of the disputed theories regarding the night before the Battle of Bosworth, Richard III's Burial, Henry Tudor's claim to the throne and other issues. There is a lot of ready reference in the text, the notes and appendices.
I'm glad the publisher sacrificed black and white for color, so there are many more pictures than you'd expect for a volume of this size.
The discussion of DNA at the end was interesting as was the discussion of the descendents of the York line.
The author has a readable style and makes the material accessible to the general reader. Those who are knowledgeable about Richard III may want to have this in their libraries for its reference value.
June 16, 2022
2.5 Stars rounded down
This was hard to rate for me.
I greatly enjoyed the pettiness of this historian, referring to The 'Tudors' as so-called and always with ''. It's hilariously, ridiculously petty and I LOVE pettiness🤷🏾♀️
The 1st half deals briefly with the 'history' of Richard III usurping the throne and focuses on the last months of his reign.
I like that he takes Bosworth out if the equation because it's easy to feel this history is predetermined by our knowledge of Bosworth.
The history tracing Richard III's DNA is fascinating and applause worthy.
The problem is the 1st half of the book is unforgivably cherry-picked, biased to a ridiculous degree for nonfiction and just historically weak.
Like I'm embarrassed for the historian. I respect his studies and education, he clearly understands this period in history flawlessly. I like him and would like to take his views more seriously but they just ignore opposing viewpoints and that can't be tolerated in nonfiction history.
Authors have to admit opposing viewpoints and refute those viewpoints with evidence or theory.
I believe that Richard III had good policies as King. He was easily a better King than Henry Vii or VIII.
He was loyal to his brother until he saw a shot at the throne and he took it🤷🏾♀️
I'm not comfortable dismissing Sir Thomas More as a Tudor propagandist. I mean given his murder under Henry VIII was for refusing to pretend to believe something he didn't believe this seems weak. This doesn't mean More got the whole story or was correct but his views have to be dealt with realistically. He had access to people who lived through these times. Some with very pertinent information.
I would intellectually love if Henry VII could reasonably be blamed for the murder of the Princes in the Tower but he can't be.
If it was Buckingham why doesn't Richard III publicly blame him?
I believe had Richard III survived Boswell he'd have come up with some alternative story, he was fairly good at propaganda himself. I mean his tarnishing of the Woodville's still impacts their legacy today and with precious little real evidence.
I want to stress that many of the above questions are addressed in this book just not to *my* satisfaction.
In the end my opinion of Richard III remains unchanged. I hope more evidence comes to light in the future regarding this, much of what we currently know or can independently verify has been found in the last 100 yrs.
Until then if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm calling it a duck.
Ashdown-Hill's writing is seductive. I can see how folks less familiar with all of the particulars are impacted by this biased history. Its largely supposition but fun!
This was hard to rate for me.
I greatly enjoyed the pettiness of this historian, referring to The 'Tudors' as so-called and always with ''. It's hilariously, ridiculously petty and I LOVE pettiness🤷🏾♀️
The 1st half deals briefly with the 'history' of Richard III usurping the throne and focuses on the last months of his reign.
I like that he takes Bosworth out if the equation because it's easy to feel this history is predetermined by our knowledge of Bosworth.
The history tracing Richard III's DNA is fascinating and applause worthy.
The problem is the 1st half of the book is unforgivably cherry-picked, biased to a ridiculous degree for nonfiction and just historically weak.
Like I'm embarrassed for the historian. I respect his studies and education, he clearly understands this period in history flawlessly. I like him and would like to take his views more seriously but they just ignore opposing viewpoints and that can't be tolerated in nonfiction history.
Authors have to admit opposing viewpoints and refute those viewpoints with evidence or theory.
I believe that Richard III had good policies as King. He was easily a better King than Henry Vii or VIII.
He was loyal to his brother until he saw a shot at the throne and he took it🤷🏾♀️
I'm not comfortable dismissing Sir Thomas More as a Tudor propagandist. I mean given his murder under Henry VIII was for refusing to pretend to believe something he didn't believe this seems weak. This doesn't mean More got the whole story or was correct but his views have to be dealt with realistically. He had access to people who lived through these times. Some with very pertinent information.
I would intellectually love if Henry VII could reasonably be blamed for the murder of the Princes in the Tower but he can't be.
If it was Buckingham why doesn't Richard III publicly blame him?
I believe had Richard III survived Boswell he'd have come up with some alternative story, he was fairly good at propaganda himself. I mean his tarnishing of the Woodville's still impacts their legacy today and with precious little real evidence.
I want to stress that many of the above questions are addressed in this book just not to *my* satisfaction.
In the end my opinion of Richard III remains unchanged. I hope more evidence comes to light in the future regarding this, much of what we currently know or can independently verify has been found in the last 100 yrs.
Until then if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm calling it a duck.
Ashdown-Hill's writing is seductive. I can see how folks less familiar with all of the particulars are impacted by this biased history. Its largely supposition but fun!
October 28, 2023
I loved it
It is a very different book about Richard III, I knew it since I read the title but I did not estimate how different it would be, I will start by saying that whenever I thought about Richard's story from a biographical point of view, I thought that the saddest thing must have been the end of his life, with so many deaths, betrayals, lies and bad things, and losing like that..... But the book led me to a very different conclusion Richard lived in a very different time, in which people died young and it almost always in a tragic way, in which life changed easily, and in which you had to sacrifice your entire life to fulfill a certain role, surely he was adapted to it, and the end of his life (without knowing that it was the end of his life) must not have been as bad as we see it, rather he seemed ready to get Tudor out of his way, and move on, he had plans, he did not seem carried away as Thomas More wrote, nor did he seem consumed , he was busy, and focused.
I also liked the part that describes what happened after the battle and what it has to do with his remains. It is actually an informative and well-researched book, although for me it is not the most organized thing in the world.
It is a very different book about Richard III, I knew it since I read the title but I did not estimate how different it would be, I will start by saying that whenever I thought about Richard's story from a biographical point of view, I thought that the saddest thing must have been the end of his life, with so many deaths, betrayals, lies and bad things, and losing like that..... But the book led me to a very different conclusion Richard lived in a very different time, in which people died young and it almost always in a tragic way, in which life changed easily, and in which you had to sacrifice your entire life to fulfill a certain role, surely he was adapted to it, and the end of his life (without knowing that it was the end of his life) must not have been as bad as we see it, rather he seemed ready to get Tudor out of his way, and move on, he had plans, he did not seem carried away as Thomas More wrote, nor did he seem consumed , he was busy, and focused.
I also liked the part that describes what happened after the battle and what it has to do with his remains. It is actually an informative and well-researched book, although for me it is not the most organized thing in the world.
May 8, 2024
2*
As a Ricardian advocate and enthusiast, it is no surprise that the author takes a very pro Richard view. However, I felt disappointed in the book and felt that the biased view diverted attention away from the content. The writer also came across as petty as throughout the book, he referred to Tudor in quotation marks. Overall, while the book was well researched with an excellent level of detail, I would have liked to have seen a more balanced tone.
As a Ricardian advocate and enthusiast, it is no surprise that the author takes a very pro Richard view. However, I felt disappointed in the book and felt that the biased view diverted attention away from the content. The writer also came across as petty as throughout the book, he referred to Tudor in quotation marks. Overall, while the book was well researched with an excellent level of detail, I would have liked to have seen a more balanced tone.
August 12, 2016
Già prima che il caro estinto venisse ritrovato sotto un parcheggio di Leicester a settembre dell'anno scorso, John Ashdown-Hill aveva fatto una serie di importanti ricerche: da tempo aveva iniziato una ricostruzione della linea di ascendenza e discendenza della madre di Riccardo III, Cecily Neville, partendo da Catherine Swynford e arrivando fino alla signora Joy Ibsen in Canada. Aveva anche identificato il luogo preciso in cui doveva trovarsi il coro (considerato il punto più probabile) della chiesa dell'abbazia in cui si pensava che Richard fosse stato sepolto.
Questa è un'edizione riveduta e corretta del suo libro, pubblicato per la prima volta nel 2010, sugli ultimi mesi di vita del re, con l'aggiunta della spiegazione di queste ricerche, arrivate ora a una fruttuosa e positiva conclusione.
Si comincia nel marzo del 1485, con la morte di Anne Neville. Ashdown-Hill salta quindi del tutto la più famosa delle controversie riguardanti Riccardo III, quella che lui definisce "the hoary and currently unproductive chestunt of 'who murdered the princes in the Tower'". Vengono ricostruiti nel dettaglio i movimenti che lo portarono a Bosworth, le negoziazioni per il matrimonio con la figlia del re del Portogallo, e ogni tanto ci sono salti indietro, per spiegare meglio il personaggio, e approfondimenti su come si viveva all'epoca. L'autore sostiene che, in questo momento, piuttosto che cercare rivelazioni al momento improbabili su chi ha ammazzato chi, o riscrivere biografie generiche, sia più importante concentrarsi su aspetti precisi della vita e del regno di Richard, per avere una visione più chiara di chi era come persona e come re. E il libro è un buon argomento per questa opinione: ho trovato molto interessanti gli aspetti di vita quotidiana, le citazioni da lettere, e i singoli passi verso il 22 agosto, anche se Bosworth in sé è descritta molto più velocemente di quanto avrei pensato. The king fought bravely to the end.
È un libro breve, ma molto meritevole, di sicuro da accompagnare a letture specifiche sulle analisi fatte sullo scheletro (di cui qui non si parla affatto). Ashdown-Hill è una figura fondamentale nel ritrovamento e nell'identificazione di Riccardo III, insieme a Philippa Langley.
Solo una cosa mi ha lasciato perplessa: la totale certezza che Ashdown-Hill mostra sull'illegalità del matrimonio tra Edward IV ed Elizabeth Woodville. Invece che mettere nelle note le fantomatiche prove che gli danno questa certezza, rimanda a un altro suo libro.
Questa è un'edizione riveduta e corretta del suo libro, pubblicato per la prima volta nel 2010, sugli ultimi mesi di vita del re, con l'aggiunta della spiegazione di queste ricerche, arrivate ora a una fruttuosa e positiva conclusione.
Si comincia nel marzo del 1485, con la morte di Anne Neville. Ashdown-Hill salta quindi del tutto la più famosa delle controversie riguardanti Riccardo III, quella che lui definisce "the hoary and currently unproductive chestunt of 'who murdered the princes in the Tower'". Vengono ricostruiti nel dettaglio i movimenti che lo portarono a Bosworth, le negoziazioni per il matrimonio con la figlia del re del Portogallo, e ogni tanto ci sono salti indietro, per spiegare meglio il personaggio, e approfondimenti su come si viveva all'epoca. L'autore sostiene che, in questo momento, piuttosto che cercare rivelazioni al momento improbabili su chi ha ammazzato chi, o riscrivere biografie generiche, sia più importante concentrarsi su aspetti precisi della vita e del regno di Richard, per avere una visione più chiara di chi era come persona e come re. E il libro è un buon argomento per questa opinione: ho trovato molto interessanti gli aspetti di vita quotidiana, le citazioni da lettere, e i singoli passi verso il 22 agosto, anche se Bosworth in sé è descritta molto più velocemente di quanto avrei pensato. The king fought bravely to the end.
È un libro breve, ma molto meritevole, di sicuro da accompagnare a letture specifiche sulle analisi fatte sullo scheletro (di cui qui non si parla affatto). Ashdown-Hill è una figura fondamentale nel ritrovamento e nell'identificazione di Riccardo III, insieme a Philippa Langley.
Solo una cosa mi ha lasciato perplessa: la totale certezza che Ashdown-Hill mostra sull'illegalità del matrimonio tra Edward IV ed Elizabeth Woodville. Invece che mettere nelle note le fantomatiche prove che gli danno questa certezza, rimanda a un altro suo libro.
May 3, 2018
If you're a Ricardian, you'll give this 5 stars. If not, you'll enjoy the first half and then be bored by the detail. This is serious stuff, but then the author has a very serious point to make - that the remains found in that Leicester car park are indeed those of King Richard III - and he makes it with a rigour that should satisfy the most stringent examining board, or jury. Of course, establishing that long-dead remains are indeed those of a King of England tells us little of the man's personality or character, but concentrating on the known facts of Richard's last 150 days is very revealing.
Increasingly now, we're coming to believe King Richard III was not the evil being of Shakespeare's great play; that the Welsh Tudors had in fact done a thorough job of assassinating the character of the last English King because their claim to the throne was so weak. One key fact the narrative brings home is that this was a man who had just lost his beloved wife and his only (legitimate) son within a year of each other. A man also troubled that his elder brother King Edward IV had married bigamously and so his children were bastards and the throne once more at risk. Hence Richard's 'usurpation' of his nephew, for the good of the Plantagenet cause. Yes, it suited Richard to eliminate 'the Princes in the Tower', but of course, it suited Henry Tudor even more, as his claim was far weaker than Richard's.
So this book is a welcome addition to the growing body of evidence that Richard was not the man history has handed down to us. But it is a book of two halves. The first half is riveting and revealing, but once Richard's dead - arguably charging bravely straight at his enemy to end the battle early and so minimise loss of life - verifying his remains is dull stuff, if an essential process.
Increasingly now, we're coming to believe King Richard III was not the evil being of Shakespeare's great play; that the Welsh Tudors had in fact done a thorough job of assassinating the character of the last English King because their claim to the throne was so weak. One key fact the narrative brings home is that this was a man who had just lost his beloved wife and his only (legitimate) son within a year of each other. A man also troubled that his elder brother King Edward IV had married bigamously and so his children were bastards and the throne once more at risk. Hence Richard's 'usurpation' of his nephew, for the good of the Plantagenet cause. Yes, it suited Richard to eliminate 'the Princes in the Tower', but of course, it suited Henry Tudor even more, as his claim was far weaker than Richard's.
So this book is a welcome addition to the growing body of evidence that Richard was not the man history has handed down to us. But it is a book of two halves. The first half is riveting and revealing, but once Richard's dead - arguably charging bravely straight at his enemy to end the battle early and so minimise loss of life - verifying his remains is dull stuff, if an essential process.
December 2, 2013
I was disappointed in this book. It came out shorty after the confirmation of the find of Richard III 's body so I assumed it was about his final days and the search for and confirmation of his body. It is really a poorly written time line of his last days and the tedious account with many sidetracks about how the DNA that could be used to confirm the body of Richard III's body if it was discovered was tracked down. If you want to know about Richard's last days, I would actually recommend the much better written fiction book called Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey.
December 18, 2011
Interesting take on the final days of a rather intriguing king. Not a one sided affair as most studies on Richard III tend to be but a more balanced tome. My only gripe - how does modern DNA studies enalble us to "discern the real Richard III" considering he left no heirs. The DNA chapter woukd have been better left for another study rather than "the last days" of Richard III.
May 22, 2017
Esta biografía de Ricardo III tiene como única novedad la investigación que se hizo luego de encontrarse sus restos en un estacionamiento en Leicester a principios de este siglo. Mediante pruebas de ADN mitocondrial se encontró en Canadá la única superviviente de la línea de los Plantagenet de York.
Respecto a la muerte de los hijos de su hermano el rey Eduardo IV, cuya desaparición y muerte se le achaca al "Tío Maldito" , parece que fue una historia inventada por su primo y usurpador del trono, Henry VII y el santo Thomas Moore, para legitimarse ante su pueblo. Para saber más sobre este asunto habrá que leer otros libros distintos a las obras de Shakespear.
Respecto a la muerte de los hijos de su hermano el rey Eduardo IV, cuya desaparición y muerte se le achaca al "Tío Maldito" , parece que fue una historia inventada por su primo y usurpador del trono, Henry VII y el santo Thomas Moore, para legitimarse ante su pueblo. Para saber más sobre este asunto habrá que leer otros libros distintos a las obras de Shakespear.
June 30, 2022
You probably would not enjoy this book. I did, however, for the most part. It's more of a scientific study in which the DNA (mitochondrial) is traced. I'm not sure what it proves, but, to me it was interesting.
December 22, 2013
"The attitudes adopted by historians tend to reflect the personal preferences of the writer." -author John Ashdown-Hill.
In a refreshing show of candor, Ashdown-Hill prefaces this book by admitting that he tends to side with the Yorkists in this dispute about the Crown during the Wars of the Roses. He also categorically states that he believes that Richard III has a superior claim to the throne than his missing nephew, Edward V (Edward IV's son and one of the 'princes in the Tower'), as he and his siblings are all illegitimate. This book is obviously Ricardian, make no mistake, and assumes that King Edward IV's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was indeed bigamous, as claimed by Bishop Stillington-- which many historians still believe is a fabrication.
The book focuses first on the last 150 days of Richard III's life. He is already King at this point but his son and heir has died and his wife is dying. Ashdown-Hill proceeds to draw conjectures about what could've happened based on the very few evidence of Richard III's movements at the time. These include what the king could've eaten for breakfast, what he would've thought of Henry Tudor coming to claim the throne etc. This would've been okay to me if this book were a work of fiction, but as it were not, I find these inferences, therefore, useless.
The author makes an interesting analysis regarding Richard III's burial and the treatment he received from Henry Tudor (now Henry VII). At present, people may have read that Richard III's body was paraded naked into Leicester and unceremoniously thrown in a grave with others, after being on display for two days. Ashdown-Hill in this book states that the King was treated as other monarchs who died in battle-- taken from the battlefield to be accorded a proper burial and stripped, not by Henry Tudor's men but probably by looters (he cited the death of Charles the Bold who died in the Battle of Nancy, also found naked and disfigured). I have read few books that have gone into detail about what Henry VII did to commemmorate the death of the erstwhile King. Well, apparently, he actually had an alabaster tomb and an epitaph created for Richard III . After all, it served the new Tudor dynasty to make due reverence to the King whom Henry VII defeated so he can be pronounced King by conquest.
The book gets more interesting after the Battle of Bosworth as it now delves with the author's contemporary studies on Richard III's burial site, his DNA and the search for his living descendants. By Chapter 14, we are given interesting notes about DNA and human origins and the mitochondrial "clan mothers" of Europe. The language gets more lively as the author gets around to the actual dig at a Leicester car park and matching the mitochondrial DNA from those bones to Richard III's 16th generation cousin who was found living in Canada. Fascinating stuff.
This book completes my personal studies on the Wars of the Roses and Richard III. Now, I am happy to go back to the frivolous but oh, so fantastic world of Victorian England through Georgette Heyer's eyes. Then, the Tudors.
In a refreshing show of candor, Ashdown-Hill prefaces this book by admitting that he tends to side with the Yorkists in this dispute about the Crown during the Wars of the Roses. He also categorically states that he believes that Richard III has a superior claim to the throne than his missing nephew, Edward V (Edward IV's son and one of the 'princes in the Tower'), as he and his siblings are all illegitimate. This book is obviously Ricardian, make no mistake, and assumes that King Edward IV's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was indeed bigamous, as claimed by Bishop Stillington-- which many historians still believe is a fabrication.
The book focuses first on the last 150 days of Richard III's life. He is already King at this point but his son and heir has died and his wife is dying. Ashdown-Hill proceeds to draw conjectures about what could've happened based on the very few evidence of Richard III's movements at the time. These include what the king could've eaten for breakfast, what he would've thought of Henry Tudor coming to claim the throne etc. This would've been okay to me if this book were a work of fiction, but as it were not, I find these inferences, therefore, useless.
The author makes an interesting analysis regarding Richard III's burial and the treatment he received from Henry Tudor (now Henry VII). At present, people may have read that Richard III's body was paraded naked into Leicester and unceremoniously thrown in a grave with others, after being on display for two days. Ashdown-Hill in this book states that the King was treated as other monarchs who died in battle-- taken from the battlefield to be accorded a proper burial and stripped, not by Henry Tudor's men but probably by looters (he cited the death of Charles the Bold who died in the Battle of Nancy, also found naked and disfigured). I have read few books that have gone into detail about what Henry VII did to commemmorate the death of the erstwhile King. Well, apparently, he actually had an alabaster tomb and an epitaph created for Richard III . After all, it served the new Tudor dynasty to make due reverence to the King whom Henry VII defeated so he can be pronounced King by conquest.
The book gets more interesting after the Battle of Bosworth as it now delves with the author's contemporary studies on Richard III's burial site, his DNA and the search for his living descendants. By Chapter 14, we are given interesting notes about DNA and human origins and the mitochondrial "clan mothers" of Europe. The language gets more lively as the author gets around to the actual dig at a Leicester car park and matching the mitochondrial DNA from those bones to Richard III's 16th generation cousin who was found living in Canada. Fascinating stuff.
This book completes my personal studies on the Wars of the Roses and Richard III. Now, I am happy to go back to the frivolous but oh, so fantastic world of Victorian England through Georgette Heyer's eyes. Then, the Tudors.
November 15, 2023
A very interesting book about the last months of Richard III life but even more interesting account of finding his burial place and how his descendants were found using DNA.
April 4, 2012
Who hasn't seen a production of Shakespeare's "The Tragedy of King Richard III" and thought, 'whoa, no one could be that bad, well, 'cept King John..." That's what I thought when I first saw Olivier's devilishly wicked and wonderful portrayal of Richard and started me on a lifetime of interest and research into the life and times of the last Yorkist/Plantagenet king. Mr. Ashdown-Hill does the continuing debate over this much-maligned king a service by setting forth a chronology of what Richard's last 150 days would have been like, based on extant documents and commentaries of the times, and bringing to light for me, new information. He validates facts and he dismisses the hearsay and conjecture started by gossip at Court that made its way into history books, following Richard's actual movements as they are known to us. While he tells us upon which side of the polarized debate he stands, he avoids the dramatic, empurpled prose and commentary of say, Kendall, to make his points and when he dismisses arguments. He gives us facts as set before him. I approached this work with skepticism, thinking, "Oh dear, another 'Did he or didn't he?' tome on the disappearance of Edward IV's sons from public view," and the rumors that followed. What a delight it was to discover new facts and clear thought. There are new interpretations of court papers and documents, e.g., the documents from Spain and Portugal concerning Richard's diplomatic efforts to find a husband for Elizabeth of York, Edward IV's eldest daughter, and a new wife for himself (after the death of his queen Anne Neville), the curious, out-of-character behavior of Richard on the night before the battle of Bosworth Field and on the morning - was it due to illness? There was a bout of Sweating Sickness going around.
Mr. Ashdown-Hill doesn't set out to prove anything except that the man Thomas More and Shakespeare handed down to history was quite different from the reality. In "The Last Days of Richard III" we see a man not plagued by ghosts or his evil deeds, but a monarch going about daily business and governance, expecting to be victorious once again on the battlefield and never expecting to die.
Mr. Ashdown-Hill doesn't set out to prove anything except that the man Thomas More and Shakespeare handed down to history was quite different from the reality. In "The Last Days of Richard III" we see a man not plagued by ghosts or his evil deeds, but a monarch going about daily business and governance, expecting to be victorious once again on the battlefield and never expecting to die.
October 12, 2014
Ashdown-Hill presents the radical thesis that Richard III did not know that the last year of his life was the last year of his life.
At first glance the reaction is ’well, duh’. (Fun fact, this was my boyfriend’s reaction when I told him what I was reading.) Unless one has a terminal diagnosis, it’s rare to know when, exactly, your sands are about to run out.
But Ashdown-Hill (rightfully) points out that historians have tended to let hindsight color histories of the last of the Plantagenet kings, always giving the last year of Richard’s reign, and, more importantly, his final battle, the air of gloomy, inevitable doom.
Here, Ashdown-Hill makes an EXCELLENT case that Richard III was going about his day to day business and making long range plans that suggest he expected to have a long reign ahead of him and that he saw Tudor as nothing more than a nuisance – something to be ticked off the To Do list in between expanding Nottingham Castle and negotiating for the hand of a Portuguese princess for his next wife. (!!!)
This is not a man weighed down with a premonition of his own tragic fate.
I was a bit bored by all the tomb and burial details, but good for him for doing the research, especially since his work was a major reason Richard III’s body was recently discovered.
The DNA section was cool, and what really struck a chord with me was the family tree showing the direct female line descent from Madame de Roet to today. I don’t think tracing the family line adds much to our knowledge of Richard as a person, but it did add a fascinating and tangible understanding to how closely the past is connected to the present.
I wasn’t a huge fan of his back-and-forth style of writing (see previous chapter, see next chapter, see above, see below, we’ll get to this in a bit, later we will examine more of this, etc.) And for all his point to show a present tense POV, he really hurried through the battle itself too fast, with no sense of immediacy or tension, but, overall, a very good book.
August 14, 2017
If I started reading this short book in April and am just finishing it today (June 2), clearly, it was not a page turner. The first half was a scattershot assembly of details about how Richard lived on a day to day basis and what he did in his last hours (including boring digressions on subjects such as what happened to the last bed he slept in). The last half was about his DNA and how his body could be definitively identified. In particular the role of mitochondrial DNA, which I hadn't previously understood, was explained, and that was interesting.
Ashdown-Hill admits up front that he is a Ricardian, (a person who loves and supports Richard III despite all the "Tudor propaganda" against him). I am not a Ricardian, but I find the existence of defenders of this last of the Medieval kings to be charming. The Ricardians are a delightfully kooky group and I really enjoyed Josephine Tey's Richard-exonerating mystery novel, The Daughter of Time. Still, even though Shakespeare's hit job against this monarch went a bit far, the Ricardians are wrong. Richard clearly murdered the princes in the tower, and I don't believe for a second that he seized the throne out of a sense of duty rather than a thirst for power. And the discovery of Richard's body definitively proved that one of the big Ricardian claims ("His hunchback is a Tudor lie!") was totally wrong. And so are Ashdown-Hill's judgments when he says things like "one key feature of Richard's character was apparently a lack of ruthlessness." Killing your tween nephews so you can be king is as ruthless as it gets.
This book rambles, and in my opinion is wrong about Richard, but some interesting bits make it worthwhile.
Ashdown-Hill admits up front that he is a Ricardian, (a person who loves and supports Richard III despite all the "Tudor propaganda" against him). I am not a Ricardian, but I find the existence of defenders of this last of the Medieval kings to be charming. The Ricardians are a delightfully kooky group and I really enjoyed Josephine Tey's Richard-exonerating mystery novel, The Daughter of Time. Still, even though Shakespeare's hit job against this monarch went a bit far, the Ricardians are wrong. Richard clearly murdered the princes in the tower, and I don't believe for a second that he seized the throne out of a sense of duty rather than a thirst for power. And the discovery of Richard's body definitively proved that one of the big Ricardian claims ("His hunchback is a Tudor lie!") was totally wrong. And so are Ashdown-Hill's judgments when he says things like "one key feature of Richard's character was apparently a lack of ruthlessness." Killing your tween nephews so you can be king is as ruthless as it gets.
This book rambles, and in my opinion is wrong about Richard, but some interesting bits make it worthwhile.
June 18, 2015
I found this interesting and readable, particularly the "humdrum" sort of stuff - times of meals, what Richard ate, daily routine, content of religious services he attended etc. There does however seem to be quite a bit of "padding" and repetition. Without it I suppose this short book would be even shorter.
The "story" of Richard's DNA is very interesting and the little vignettes of some of his indirect descendants, (his own children died without issue) particularly so. However the padding did come undone at one point when he referred to one of these. This person is shown in one of the many genealogical charts in the book. However the date of death given in the chart is 1899. In the body of the book Laura Vansittart Neale is said to have died in "the year after Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee" -ie 1888. Her dates on the chart are shown as 1816-1899. In the body of the book she is said to have died aged 62.This raised doubts in my mind, no doubt unnecessarily, as to overall veracity.Probably over harsh.
The "story" of Richard's DNA is very interesting and the little vignettes of some of his indirect descendants, (his own children died without issue) particularly so. However the padding did come undone at one point when he referred to one of these. This person is shown in one of the many genealogical charts in the book. However the date of death given in the chart is 1899. In the body of the book Laura Vansittart Neale is said to have died in "the year after Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee" -ie 1888. Her dates on the chart are shown as 1816-1899. In the body of the book she is said to have died aged 62.This raised doubts in my mind, no doubt unnecessarily, as to overall veracity.Probably over harsh.
September 16, 2013
This was REALLY well done.
Ashdown-Hill explicitly and consciously went back to source material, and re-examined the last 150 days of Richard III's reign (from just after Anne's death to his own death at Bosworth) almost day by day.
One interesting point was that his interpretation/reading of the famous letter from Elizabeth of York to the Duke of Norfolk (which has traditionally been understood to refer to Richard's plans to marry Elizabeth himself) was very different. His reading is that it's in reference to the planned marriages of Richard and Elizabeth to Portuguese royalty, and he has evidence to back this reading up.
Some of the references were a bit weird (a bunch of websites, including some wikipedia pages, although those were primarily natural - plants, date references, etc., rather than historical,) it was overall an EXCELLENT read.
Also, he predicted almost exactly where Richard's body would be found, 2+ years before it was discovered.
Ashdown-Hill explicitly and consciously went back to source material, and re-examined the last 150 days of Richard III's reign (from just after Anne's death to his own death at Bosworth) almost day by day.
One interesting point was that his interpretation/reading of the famous letter from Elizabeth of York to the Duke of Norfolk (which has traditionally been understood to refer to Richard's plans to marry Elizabeth himself) was very different. His reading is that it's in reference to the planned marriages of Richard and Elizabeth to Portuguese royalty, and he has evidence to back this reading up.
Some of the references were a bit weird (a bunch of websites, including some wikipedia pages, although those were primarily natural - plants, date references, etc., rather than historical,) it was overall an EXCELLENT read.
Also, he predicted almost exactly where Richard's body would be found, 2+ years before it was discovered.
May 4, 2017
A fascinating look into the life and death of Richard Isi including a hundred plus pages of appendices packed full of corroborating information.. The author has sleuthed his way through 500 years of history and his research into Dna is mind boggling. Well done for a very interesting subject and read.
September 18, 2023
A detailed and alternative account of the final days of the much maligned (by Shakespeare et Al) of Richard III, his burial and mitochondrial DNA. Not sure that the book holds much interest for the general reader of British history and tracing of the king’s DNA is of even less interest to those outside his line of descent
February 27, 2022
Interesting, but possibly only for True Believers ....
Now, I have long considered myself unparalleled in my devotion to the Last True King of England (aka, the King in the North ...)*, but I now know that I am no more than a base amateur. John Ashdown-Hill doesn't miss any opportunity to fly the flag of the White Boar, and make clear his opinion that THE WRONG GUY WON. If you aren't devoted to the memory of King Richard III, and delighted by any morsel of minutiae that will demonstrate that he was a nice guy, a good man, and the legitimate king, then you might find that this begins to wear on you very, very quickly.
I loved it. Well, loved it, in spite of its flaws. It is filled with tiny factoids about the final 8 months of the life of Richard Plantagenet, Duke of Gloucester, and last King of the House of York. It ends with an extended coda, showing how genealogical research and DNA analysis enabled Ashdown-Hill to verify that the skeleton found under a Leicester car park are the earthly remains of Richard.
What Ashdown-Hill doesn't know specifically about Richard from the records of those months, he extrapolates from the records and evidence of other contemporaries -- as a reconstruction of the day to day life of a high-status man of the late 15th century, I found it very interesting. Others might find that their eyes are rolling back in their heads, and they are begging "shoot me now" -- that's ok, we're all different. Just be warned.
Ashdown-Hill's writing and organization of his material has some of the hallmarks of the amateur enthusiast. There is a lot of unnecessary repetition. There's a valid question to be asked about how much detail is TOO much detail. (Did I really need to know the full history of hunting birds and their prey in England, for example? It didn't feel like it at the time ... ) And he seems to give equal weight to all information/revelations: one bit of information he mentions (that Lord Stanley's excuse for refusing to commit himself and his troops to Richard's force was that he was suffering from the sweating sickness) leads to the very interesting conjecture that Stanley's messenger might have passed on the sickness to Richard -- which might account for Richard's being sub-par physically and mentally on the day of his final battle, and contributed to his defeat. A better writer, I think, would have made more of this -- not buried the lede -- but it gets lost in nit-picking discussions of the provenance of camp beds and portable altars. (There was more than once when my heart sank when I saw the phrase, "perhaps a little more needs to be said about this ..." No. Trust me, no, it didn't ...)
I also enjoyed the chapters about the genealogical research that resulted in the identification of Richard's niece sixteen times removed, the direct descendent of his sister Anne, Countess of Exeter, in the female line (the one that counts for the all-important mtDNA). It was like a Very Special Episode of Who Do You Think You Are?, and I can imagine the delight of Mrs Joy Ibsen, of London, Ontario, when she discovered that, not only was she the nieceX16 of Richard III, but that this took her family tree "back to the Emperor Charlemange and beyond."
Ashdown-Hill's partisanship sometimes gets a little ... well, excessive? You know I'm on his side, but putting the "Tudor" in Henry Tudor's name in air-quotes EVERY SINGLE BLINKIN' TIME he is mentioned begins to feel just unnecessarily rude. (A-H thinks Henry's patronymic should have been Beaufort. OK, I get it. Say it once, and move on, for the love of God. Also the weaponised use of the phrase soi-disant. Ouch.) Enjoyed the hilarious verbal contortions he gets into when he talks about Edward IV's marriage, and the woman usually referred to as his Queen, Elizabeth Woodville (according to A-H, she is only Lady Grey, his partner in a "bigamous pretended marriage." Again, ouch.)
As to the Big Issue, the elephant in the room -- did he kill the kids (or, more plausibly, give orders resulting in the Princes in the Tower being killed)? -- Ashdown Hill only touches very lightly upon this in his final chapter. Fair enough, it's outside his timeframe for this book, so in the main text, he makes do with mentioning the attitude of his contemporaries, and events that hint at his clear conscience (Possibly sitting through a performance of a Nottingham mystery play about the Massacre of the Innocents?) And a bit of a hand grenade lobbed into a footnote (yes, I read the footnotes. Sue me ..): "...it is possible that their eldest son 'Edward V' [those air-quotes again!!] had by this time also succumbed to death by natural causes." (footnote 25, Chapter 2) WHAT????
So, I'd say -- very interesting and well-researched, if you like this sort of thing, but be prepared for a partisan spin on everything, that sometimes gets in the way of real scholarship and understanding ... But as a loyal Ricardian, I couldn't help but be touched by the vindication of Ashdown-Hill's research, and his persistence. And to be genuinely moved when Richard's bones are removed from their grave under the carpark, packed in polythene bags in a long cardboard box for safe storage and examination at Leicester University, and Ashdown-Hill is "asked ... to carry that box to the white van that was waiting ... At that moment, I felt that I was as close as I would ever be to the real Richard III.>"
* Yes, I read Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time. That lady has a LOT to answer for, for her impact on impressionable teenage girls with a Thing about British history ...
Now, I have long considered myself unparalleled in my devotion to the Last True King of England (aka, the King in the North ...)*, but I now know that I am no more than a base amateur. John Ashdown-Hill doesn't miss any opportunity to fly the flag of the White Boar, and make clear his opinion that THE WRONG GUY WON. If you aren't devoted to the memory of King Richard III, and delighted by any morsel of minutiae that will demonstrate that he was a nice guy, a good man, and the legitimate king, then you might find that this begins to wear on you very, very quickly.
I loved it. Well, loved it, in spite of its flaws. It is filled with tiny factoids about the final 8 months of the life of Richard Plantagenet, Duke of Gloucester, and last King of the House of York. It ends with an extended coda, showing how genealogical research and DNA analysis enabled Ashdown-Hill to verify that the skeleton found under a Leicester car park are the earthly remains of Richard.
What Ashdown-Hill doesn't know specifically about Richard from the records of those months, he extrapolates from the records and evidence of other contemporaries -- as a reconstruction of the day to day life of a high-status man of the late 15th century, I found it very interesting. Others might find that their eyes are rolling back in their heads, and they are begging "shoot me now" -- that's ok, we're all different. Just be warned.
Ashdown-Hill's writing and organization of his material has some of the hallmarks of the amateur enthusiast. There is a lot of unnecessary repetition. There's a valid question to be asked about how much detail is TOO much detail. (Did I really need to know the full history of hunting birds and their prey in England, for example? It didn't feel like it at the time ... ) And he seems to give equal weight to all information/revelations: one bit of information he mentions (that Lord Stanley's excuse for refusing to commit himself and his troops to Richard's force was that he was suffering from the sweating sickness) leads to the very interesting conjecture that Stanley's messenger might have passed on the sickness to Richard -- which might account for Richard's being sub-par physically and mentally on the day of his final battle, and contributed to his defeat. A better writer, I think, would have made more of this -- not buried the lede -- but it gets lost in nit-picking discussions of the provenance of camp beds and portable altars. (There was more than once when my heart sank when I saw the phrase, "perhaps a little more needs to be said about this ..." No. Trust me, no, it didn't ...)
I also enjoyed the chapters about the genealogical research that resulted in the identification of Richard's niece sixteen times removed, the direct descendent of his sister Anne, Countess of Exeter, in the female line (the one that counts for the all-important mtDNA). It was like a Very Special Episode of Who Do You Think You Are?, and I can imagine the delight of Mrs Joy Ibsen, of London, Ontario, when she discovered that, not only was she the nieceX16 of Richard III, but that this took her family tree "back to the Emperor Charlemange and beyond."
Ashdown-Hill's partisanship sometimes gets a little ... well, excessive? You know I'm on his side, but putting the "Tudor" in Henry Tudor's name in air-quotes EVERY SINGLE BLINKIN' TIME he is mentioned begins to feel just unnecessarily rude. (A-H thinks Henry's patronymic should have been Beaufort. OK, I get it. Say it once, and move on, for the love of God. Also the weaponised use of the phrase soi-disant. Ouch.) Enjoyed the hilarious verbal contortions he gets into when he talks about Edward IV's marriage, and the woman usually referred to as his Queen, Elizabeth Woodville (according to A-H, she is only Lady Grey, his partner in a "bigamous pretended marriage." Again, ouch.)
As to the Big Issue, the elephant in the room -- did he kill the kids (or, more plausibly, give orders resulting in the Princes in the Tower being killed)? -- Ashdown Hill only touches very lightly upon this in his final chapter. Fair enough, it's outside his timeframe for this book, so in the main text, he makes do with mentioning the attitude of his contemporaries, and events that hint at his clear conscience (Possibly sitting through a performance of a Nottingham mystery play about the Massacre of the Innocents?) And a bit of a hand grenade lobbed into a footnote (yes, I read the footnotes. Sue me ..): "...it is possible that their eldest son 'Edward V' [those air-quotes again!!] had by this time also succumbed to death by natural causes." (footnote 25, Chapter 2) WHAT????
So, I'd say -- very interesting and well-researched, if you like this sort of thing, but be prepared for a partisan spin on everything, that sometimes gets in the way of real scholarship and understanding ... But as a loyal Ricardian, I couldn't help but be touched by the vindication of Ashdown-Hill's research, and his persistence. And to be genuinely moved when Richard's bones are removed from their grave under the carpark, packed in polythene bags in a long cardboard box for safe storage and examination at Leicester University, and Ashdown-Hill is "asked ... to carry that box to the white van that was waiting ... At that moment, I felt that I was as close as I would ever be to the real Richard III.>"
* Yes, I read Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time. That lady has a LOT to answer for, for her impact on impressionable teenage girls with a Thing about British history ...
September 23, 2017
One of the more entertaining controversies about English history and its contemporary relevance is the fight that goes on over the life and behavior of Richard III. Some of the facts involved are easy to determine. Richard III took power after the death of his older brother Edward IV, he put the princes in the Tower of London where they were never seen again and soon were thought to have been killed, he was unable to secure the legitimacy of his line after the death of his wife and his only son, and he had to deal with frequent treachery until the time of his death at the Battle of Bosworth to a ragtag army. Writings about this context [1] tend to traffic in a set of legends that are popularly known as the white legend (which this book comes from the perspective of), the grey legend, and the black legend. Even if there have been few new facts, other than the fact that Richard III was found in the car park where this book believes him to have been buried, over the past few years, there has been a long-running battle going back to Tudor times about whether Richard III was really as evil as is supposed or not.
This short book of not even 150 pages of reading material looks at the last few months of the life of Richard III from the death of his son and then his wife to his death and then his historical memory. The book shows that Richard III was engaged in marriage negotiations with both the Kingdoms of Portugal and Castile for dynastic marriages that would help to connect branches of the Plantagenet family together and provide him with an heir to the throne to continue his dynasty. The author discusses the travels of Richard III, his love of hunting, and claims a political naivete in not killing the untrustworthy Stanleys who would later betray him at Bosworth by first remaining neutral and then attacking Richard III when his assault on Henry Tudor failed, and who were viewed as untrustworthy even before the battle. The author, overall, tries to present Richard III as someone who was deeply bound by ties of honor and a high degree of religious morality and fidelity to his wife, while sidestepping questions of what Richard III had done to reach the position he was in.
Overall, this book provides a plausible enough tale, but the scope of the work is something that is surely of interest. There are simply too few details known of the life of Richard III for such a book to be written without a lot of borrowing and suppositions. What is known is interesting, including sermon messages that delicately discussed the matter of the princes of the tower as well as a claim that Henry VII used Swiss-inspired tactics of massed pikemen to defeat the charge of Richard III, which would have meant that Richard III's defeat was similar to those suffered by Charles the Rash of Burgundy against the Swiss during the same time period, a context that is not often appreciated. At any rate, this is a polished effort that gives Richard III every benefit of the doubt, even to the point of providing a relatively positive discussion of his funeral arrangements and the memorial provided by the victor of Bosworth some years later in Leicester. If you want the best possible interpretation of Richard III as a king as he approached his death, although he did not know it, this book is certainly one that provides such a perspective. Whether or not its point of view can be believed, those Ricardians who want to believe the best of the last of the Plantagenet rulers of England would do well to read this book.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
This short book of not even 150 pages of reading material looks at the last few months of the life of Richard III from the death of his son and then his wife to his death and then his historical memory. The book shows that Richard III was engaged in marriage negotiations with both the Kingdoms of Portugal and Castile for dynastic marriages that would help to connect branches of the Plantagenet family together and provide him with an heir to the throne to continue his dynasty. The author discusses the travels of Richard III, his love of hunting, and claims a political naivete in not killing the untrustworthy Stanleys who would later betray him at Bosworth by first remaining neutral and then attacking Richard III when his assault on Henry Tudor failed, and who were viewed as untrustworthy even before the battle. The author, overall, tries to present Richard III as someone who was deeply bound by ties of honor and a high degree of religious morality and fidelity to his wife, while sidestepping questions of what Richard III had done to reach the position he was in.
Overall, this book provides a plausible enough tale, but the scope of the work is something that is surely of interest. There are simply too few details known of the life of Richard III for such a book to be written without a lot of borrowing and suppositions. What is known is interesting, including sermon messages that delicately discussed the matter of the princes of the tower as well as a claim that Henry VII used Swiss-inspired tactics of massed pikemen to defeat the charge of Richard III, which would have meant that Richard III's defeat was similar to those suffered by Charles the Rash of Burgundy against the Swiss during the same time period, a context that is not often appreciated. At any rate, this is a polished effort that gives Richard III every benefit of the doubt, even to the point of providing a relatively positive discussion of his funeral arrangements and the memorial provided by the victor of Bosworth some years later in Leicester. If you want the best possible interpretation of Richard III as a king as he approached his death, although he did not know it, this book is certainly one that provides such a perspective. Whether or not its point of view can be believed, those Ricardians who want to believe the best of the last of the Plantagenet rulers of England would do well to read this book.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
March 31, 2019
A fast read, the first third or so was useful in explaining the historical facts behind Shakespeare'sRichard III, which is at the very least confusing for those who haven't studied their English History--all those Edwards and Margarets and Elizabeths and Richards get tangled up. There's also the little matter of separating historical fact from duh-rammma and Shakespeare's demonization of the king who was not a hunchback nor born with a full set of teeth.
The book is also interesting given the finding of Richard's bones in 2012 and reinstatement (if that's the word I want) in Leicester Cathedral.
However--and it's a big "however"--I did find the text repetitive, with its constant "as will be seen later", "as we will discuss in a later chapter" etc. Of course, if the author had limited himself to Richard's literal "final days", it would have made a very short book, and he knew he was dealing with a readership that probably didn't know all the ins and outs of life in the fifteenth century. There is a lot of background information on food, clothes, hunting etc--interesting in itself, but it leads to yet more repetition and backtracking.
I did appreciate the author's honesty in the Introduction and opening chapter, where he freely admits that not only is history written by the conquerors, but that any historian sees the sources, events and people through the filter of his or her own ideas, convictions, experience, and education. There is no such thing as objective impartiality when dealing with letters or history. I did find myself skimming, while seeking the nuggets of fact I needed in among all the filler, and I did get heartily sick of the constant references to "Tudor" in inverted commas. That is the title he has borne throughout history, everyone even mildly interested in the subject knows who is meant. Calling him Henry "Tudor" in every sentence just points to the author's own smouldering issues and reduces his credibility.
The book is also interesting given the finding of Richard's bones in 2012 and reinstatement (if that's the word I want) in Leicester Cathedral.
However--and it's a big "however"--I did find the text repetitive, with its constant "as will be seen later", "as we will discuss in a later chapter" etc. Of course, if the author had limited himself to Richard's literal "final days", it would have made a very short book, and he knew he was dealing with a readership that probably didn't know all the ins and outs of life in the fifteenth century. There is a lot of background information on food, clothes, hunting etc--interesting in itself, but it leads to yet more repetition and backtracking.
I did appreciate the author's honesty in the Introduction and opening chapter, where he freely admits that not only is history written by the conquerors, but that any historian sees the sources, events and people through the filter of his or her own ideas, convictions, experience, and education. There is no such thing as objective impartiality when dealing with letters or history. I did find myself skimming, while seeking the nuggets of fact I needed in among all the filler, and I did get heartily sick of the constant references to "Tudor" in inverted commas. That is the title he has borne throughout history, everyone even mildly interested in the subject knows who is meant. Calling him Henry "Tudor" in every sentence just points to the author's own smouldering issues and reduces his credibility.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews