What do you think?
Rate this book
George III: A Personal History
In George III: A Personal History, British historian Christopher Hibbert reassesses the royal monarch George III (1738–1820). Rather than reaffirm George III’s reputation as “Mad King George,” Hibbert portrays him as not only a competent ruler during most of his reign, but also as a patron of the arts and sciences, as a man of wit and intelligence, indeed, as a man who “greatly enhanced the reputation of the British monarchy” until he was finally stricken by a rare hereditary disease.Teeming with court machinations, sexual intrigues, and familial conflicts, George III opens a window on the tumultuous, rambunctious, revolutionary eighteenth century. It is sure to alter our understanding of this fascinating, complex, and very human king who so strongly shaped England’s —and America’s—destiny.
464 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 1998
10 people are currently reading
784 people want to read
About the author
Christopher Hibbert
144 books311 followersChristopher Hibbert, MC, FRSL, FRGS (5 March 1924 - 21 December 2008) was an English writer, historian and biographer. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and the author of many books, including Disraeli, Edward VII, George IV, The Rise and Fall of the House of Medici, and Cavaliers and Roundheads.
Described by Professor Sir John Plumb as "a writer of the highest ability and in the New Statesman as "a pearl of biographers," he established himself as a leading popular historian/biographer whose works reflected meticulous scholarship.
Described by Professor Sir John Plumb as "a writer of the highest ability and in the New Statesman as "a pearl of biographers," he established himself as a leading popular historian/biographer whose works reflected meticulous scholarship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
September 5, 2025
How will he be Remembered?
Christopher Hibbert is the master of sweeping and easy historical biography, having covered some of the major figures of the last 200 or so years. Although his work would not stand up in academic circles, he is balanced in his analysis and he has influenced many modern historians and made his subjects accessible to the wider public. His work on King George III of Great Britain and Ireland is no different. This is a meticulously researched and engaging book that offers a nuanced portrait of one of Britain's most misunderstood monarchs. Often remembered as the ‘mad king’ who lost the American colonies, George III has been the subject of much historical debate. Hibbert's work aims to go beyond these simplistic labels, providing readers with a more comprehensive understanding of the man and his reign. A great example of this is his walks around the countryside where he would speak to his subjects and often leave money for them at their homes. The paradox is that he was loved at home and used as a hate figure in the colonies during the revolutionary war.
The book is organized chronologically, beginning with George III's childhood and tracing his life through his long reign, which lasted from 1760 to 1820. Hibbert covers key events such as the American Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, and the political challenges George faced in dealing with Parliament and his ministers. However, Hibbert's primary focus is on George's personal life, such as his family, his interests, and his infamous bouts of mental illness. What sets Hibbert's biography apart and is classic in his style is his attention to the private side of George III. The author delves into George's deep sense of duty, his devotion to his family, and his efforts to live a virtuous life according to the principles of the Enlightenment. Hibbert paints a picture of a king who was conscientious and genuinely cared for his subjects, even as his reign was marked by significant challenges and controversies.
Hibbert presents George III as a complex and often contradictory figure. He was a man of deep piety and moral conviction, yet his inability to compromise politically led to significant conflicts. The king's mental illness, now widely believed to have been caused by porphyria, is explored with sensitivity, and Hibbert refrains from reducing George's entire reign to his periods of madness. Instead, he shows how George's illness affected not only his own life but also the course of British politics. One of the key themes of the book is the tension between George's personal ideals and the political realities of his time. Hibbert highlights the king's efforts to maintain royal authority in an era when the power of the monarchy was increasingly being challenged. This struggle is illustrated through George's often strained relationships with his ministers, as well as his determination to keep Britain at war with revolutionary France.
As always, Hibbert's writing is clear, accessible, and often lively. He has a gift for bringing historical figures to life, and his narrative is peppered with anecdotes and vivid descriptions that make George III's world feel tangible. Hibbert is also careful to contextualise the king's actions within the broader historical landscape, providing readers with a well-rounded view of the period. In case you are wondering this is a sympathetic perspective, but is not hagiographic. Hibbert does not shy away from criticizing George III where criticism is due. For example, when considering his stubbornness, his micromanagement, or his failures in dealing with the American colonies. Yet, Hibbert also emphasizes the king's virtues and the immense pressures he faced, offering a balanced assessment that neither demonises nor idealises him.
Although I now feel Andrew Robert’s work on the monarch has overtaken this, with new archival material being made available since Hibbert’s publication, which has changed how we think about the illness or his ‘charges’ by the founding fathers of America. Christopher Hibbert's work is still an important contribution to the scholarship on this monarch. By focusing on George as a person rather than just a symbol or figurehead, Hibbert challenges the traditional narrative of George III as merely the tyrant who drove the American colonies to rebellion. The book provides valuable insights into the human side of kingship, showing how personal and psychological factors can shape the course of history. It has helped the complexities of a misunderstood monarch become accessible to the general public and help us overcome the myths which have tarnished his reputation.
Christopher Hibbert is the master of sweeping and easy historical biography, having covered some of the major figures of the last 200 or so years. Although his work would not stand up in academic circles, he is balanced in his analysis and he has influenced many modern historians and made his subjects accessible to the wider public. His work on King George III of Great Britain and Ireland is no different. This is a meticulously researched and engaging book that offers a nuanced portrait of one of Britain's most misunderstood monarchs. Often remembered as the ‘mad king’ who lost the American colonies, George III has been the subject of much historical debate. Hibbert's work aims to go beyond these simplistic labels, providing readers with a more comprehensive understanding of the man and his reign. A great example of this is his walks around the countryside where he would speak to his subjects and often leave money for them at their homes. The paradox is that he was loved at home and used as a hate figure in the colonies during the revolutionary war.
The book is organized chronologically, beginning with George III's childhood and tracing his life through his long reign, which lasted from 1760 to 1820. Hibbert covers key events such as the American Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, and the political challenges George faced in dealing with Parliament and his ministers. However, Hibbert's primary focus is on George's personal life, such as his family, his interests, and his infamous bouts of mental illness. What sets Hibbert's biography apart and is classic in his style is his attention to the private side of George III. The author delves into George's deep sense of duty, his devotion to his family, and his efforts to live a virtuous life according to the principles of the Enlightenment. Hibbert paints a picture of a king who was conscientious and genuinely cared for his subjects, even as his reign was marked by significant challenges and controversies.
Hibbert presents George III as a complex and often contradictory figure. He was a man of deep piety and moral conviction, yet his inability to compromise politically led to significant conflicts. The king's mental illness, now widely believed to have been caused by porphyria, is explored with sensitivity, and Hibbert refrains from reducing George's entire reign to his periods of madness. Instead, he shows how George's illness affected not only his own life but also the course of British politics. One of the key themes of the book is the tension between George's personal ideals and the political realities of his time. Hibbert highlights the king's efforts to maintain royal authority in an era when the power of the monarchy was increasingly being challenged. This struggle is illustrated through George's often strained relationships with his ministers, as well as his determination to keep Britain at war with revolutionary France.
As always, Hibbert's writing is clear, accessible, and often lively. He has a gift for bringing historical figures to life, and his narrative is peppered with anecdotes and vivid descriptions that make George III's world feel tangible. Hibbert is also careful to contextualise the king's actions within the broader historical landscape, providing readers with a well-rounded view of the period. In case you are wondering this is a sympathetic perspective, but is not hagiographic. Hibbert does not shy away from criticizing George III where criticism is due. For example, when considering his stubbornness, his micromanagement, or his failures in dealing with the American colonies. Yet, Hibbert also emphasizes the king's virtues and the immense pressures he faced, offering a balanced assessment that neither demonises nor idealises him.
Although I now feel Andrew Robert’s work on the monarch has overtaken this, with new archival material being made available since Hibbert’s publication, which has changed how we think about the illness or his ‘charges’ by the founding fathers of America. Christopher Hibbert's work is still an important contribution to the scholarship on this monarch. By focusing on George as a person rather than just a symbol or figurehead, Hibbert challenges the traditional narrative of George III as merely the tyrant who drove the American colonies to rebellion. The book provides valuable insights into the human side of kingship, showing how personal and psychological factors can shape the course of history. It has helped the complexities of a misunderstood monarch become accessible to the general public and help us overcome the myths which have tarnished his reputation.
December 11, 2018
Audiobook #236
March 22, 2017
A well-written and evenhanded biography of George III, with an emphasis on his personal life.
Hibbert does a great job fleshing out the pain of the king’s eventual mental illness and its effect on the queen, as well as his thoughtful and selfless approach to public service, as well as his fairness, decency and his dignified bearing. Hibbert describes the king’s difficult relationship with his sons.
The narrative seems a bit drawn out at times. Also, the coverage of the king’s impact in both Europe and North America may not satisfy every reader.
A readable, sympathetic work overall.
Hibbert does a great job fleshing out the pain of the king’s eventual mental illness and its effect on the queen, as well as his thoughtful and selfless approach to public service, as well as his fairness, decency and his dignified bearing. Hibbert describes the king’s difficult relationship with his sons.
The narrative seems a bit drawn out at times. Also, the coverage of the king’s impact in both Europe and North America may not satisfy every reader.
A readable, sympathetic work overall.
August 21, 2018
This is a solid, thorough biography of George III with an emphasis on his politics and relations with his ministers. It doesn't delve deeply into the ideas being debated during his reign or the intellectual movements of his era, but it is rich in detail about his character and family--appropriate enough for this very family-oriented monarch. The wars that dominated his reign are also given fairly short shrift here. Hibbert is habitually cautious when it comes to presenting speculation as fact, even refraining from decisively labeling King George's recurrent illness as porphyria (the widespread belief in this diagnosis is mentioned in a footnote). For those looking to learn more about England in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, this book will provide reliable if somewhat narrowly focused information.
October 27, 2011
As an American citizen, I am a citizen of a very young nation. A past that stretches back only a few hundred years, unlike other nations that have national histories that go back thousands. There is some advantage to that; we can easily separate history from myth with more efficiency than some of our older brother-nations. However, it does however make our past very plain, when studying the Middle Ages the origins of our nation are on both sides of the Atlantic, but neither is really `us.' Although a die-hard republican,* I have always been fascinated by the concept of monarchy. The idea of supreme power--sometimes absolute power--invested in one man or woman just by virtue of birth was always amazing to me. Occasionally children coming to the throne as small children or even infants; King Louis XIV of France was enthroned at age four and ruled for over seventy years. When I first learned of it, I wanted to know exactly how the hereditary succession worked and what all the various titles meant. Nevertheless, what I really found most interesting was how a concept of government that had lasted for over thousands of years suddenly ended.
One of the interesting facts I learned was that a good deal of these last monarchs were not solely responsible for bringing an end to their kingdoms but often they were too stupid to find a way to solve their problems. King Louis XVI**, Tsar Nicholas II, and Kaiser Wilhelm II were all stupid fools who probably did not have to lose their thrones, and, in the case of the French king and Russian emperor, their lives. Still, that ancient way of government did end, and, as a result, citizens of those nations look at monarchy as something that they use to have and is part of their past. Britain, Spain, and many other European nations still have kings and queens, although, with rare exception, they are now mostly just figureheads.
In the United States before we had our successful constitutional government, we had an unsuccessful constitutional government in the Articles of Confederation. We have no direct and apparent link to the world of kings, queens, and emperors. Yet, we were once colonies under Great Britain and other parts of the nation once belonged to Spain and Hawaii itself was once the Kingdom of Hawai'i so we do have some relationship to crowns of old.
Therefore, in a way, King George III was our last monarch and there has always been a part of me that is fascinated by the man. In the United States there are generally five kings that we are aware of. The first is King Tut, although very few of us can say or spell his real name: Tutankhamen. The second would be King Ferdinand of Spain for being Queen Isabella's husband and sending Christopher Columbus on his missions to the New World. The third would King Ferdinand's son-in-law King Henry VIII, although we Americans think the number eight had something to do with the amount of wives he had--that were six, not eight--not the line of Henrys the preceded him. Generally, we know nothing about England's other seven King Henrys. The fourth would be King James for writing the Bible and for Jamestown. Lastly, we know of King George and the American Revolution, although very few American could tell you that it was George the Third, as opposed to any of the other five Georges. Yet, he is the king who is in many ways directly responsible for who we are today, though not in a way which he would approve. Nevertheless, because of his long reign, the fate of many nations would undergo an incredible transformation. His legacy would be consistently redefined he would be lovingly called `Farmer George,' angrily called a tyrant spelled out in the American Declaration of Independence, and mockingly called the `Mad Monarch' due to a life time battle with mental illness.
Hibbert captures all of this in his book. He tells the story of a very powerful but dysfunctional family in the eighteenth century British Royals. When the young prince was born his father, the Prince of Wales, and his grandfather, King George II, were not in speaking terms to state it mildly.
Royal families, like most families, find that such dysfunction works in circles carrying down the generations. As the Prince of Wales, King George II was in consistent disagreement with King George I. When Fredrick, the Prince of Wales, dies in 1751 and new young prince--Fredrick's son, George, was granted the traditional Prince of Wales title, the dysfunction continued. As the King, George III would prove no better a father to his heir; struggling with his son for decades as his own Prince of Wales would continue to disappoint him.
"His grandfather, the King, took little interest in Prince George's progress. He nominated him a Knight of the Garter soon after his eleventh birthday; but he did so only because he was advised that he would be harshly criticized by the Opposition for the neglect if he did not, and he seems not to have answered Prince George's respectful and dutiful letter of thanks for the honour, merely sending it on to one of his Secretaries of State." p.11
Hibbert describes a monarch who accepts the concept of constitutional monarchy, the king's power having legal limits, but is determined to use the powers that are rightfully his. Growing up, he was closer to his mother and the Dowager Princess of Wales would instruct he son to `be a king' not to reign but to rule. The King would rule long enough to see all that he believed in challenged both at home by Charles Fox, in his colonies by the American Revolutionaries, and across the English Channel by French Revolutionaries who deposed his hated rival King Louis XVI claiming that they would bring an end to monarchy. This would unite the monarchs of Europe like never before, King George would even go out of his way to help the Jacobite pretender, the Cardinal Henry Stuart.
"He was well aware that theoretically nothing in either the Bill of Rights of 1689 or the 1701 Act of Settlement stood in the way of his declaring war, nominating peers, appointing bishops and summoning or dissolving Parliament. But in practice he was constrained from doing so, since the Civil List Act of 1698 was intended to give the monarchy finances enough only for the Court and the civil service. It was Parliament which voted money each year for the Army and Navy and for servicing the national debt. The King, therefore, needed Parliament's approval of his Government, and he soon came to realize that his undoubted power of appointing Ministers was qualified by the necessity of gaining parliamentary support for their measures. That requirement was not, however, such a restriction as might have been expected, since there was a widespread belief that any King's Minister ought to be given a fair chance to prove himself and since the existence of a large `court party' of office-holders in both Houses of Parliament ensured that the resignation of a First Minister was rarely brought about by parliamentary defeat." p.76-7
However there is also a very human side to this famous king, he was in person very kind and charitable, he gave a great deal of his personnel funds to help those in need, and he could very forgiving to those had wronged him, even those who a tried to kill him.
In government, the King believed that the monarch should be beyond politics. Unfortunately, the King also felt that he should govern directly as he felt strong monarch should. Thus you have a contradiction for one cannot act in a political manner and remain apolitical***. He saw criticism of him as an attack on the state itself and any attack on the state to be an attack on him. This attitude would help drive colonists in America towards more permanent solution to their problems with Britain by declaring George a tyrant and unfit to rule them. The American Revolution broke the spirit of the old King, five years after he would have to battle to regain his senses when he lost control of his mind in 1789. He recovered but would have to battle mental illness attacks for the rest of his life.
King George III left a strange legacy. He was neither a bad person nor a terrible king. Nevertheless, his legacy in America is one tyranny that led to the independence of the United States; and his legacy in Britain as the `Mad Monarch' would led to a tradition of the monarch being, although powerful on paper, a ceremonial figurehead who reigns but does not rule--the exact opposite of what King George wanted--and government ministers who would govern from and be responsible to the House of Commons in Parliament.
*That is republican with the little `r,' politically I am a moderate left-leaning Democrat, I refer to republican as one who supports having a Republic as the best form of government.
**Technically, he was not the last king of France but essentially monarchy, as it existed, did end with his reign.
***Interestingly, the way George III viewed the monarchy is the same way George Washington view the American presidency. That is my personal view not that of the author.
One of the interesting facts I learned was that a good deal of these last monarchs were not solely responsible for bringing an end to their kingdoms but often they were too stupid to find a way to solve their problems. King Louis XVI**, Tsar Nicholas II, and Kaiser Wilhelm II were all stupid fools who probably did not have to lose their thrones, and, in the case of the French king and Russian emperor, their lives. Still, that ancient way of government did end, and, as a result, citizens of those nations look at monarchy as something that they use to have and is part of their past. Britain, Spain, and many other European nations still have kings and queens, although, with rare exception, they are now mostly just figureheads.
In the United States before we had our successful constitutional government, we had an unsuccessful constitutional government in the Articles of Confederation. We have no direct and apparent link to the world of kings, queens, and emperors. Yet, we were once colonies under Great Britain and other parts of the nation once belonged to Spain and Hawaii itself was once the Kingdom of Hawai'i so we do have some relationship to crowns of old.
Therefore, in a way, King George III was our last monarch and there has always been a part of me that is fascinated by the man. In the United States there are generally five kings that we are aware of. The first is King Tut, although very few of us can say or spell his real name: Tutankhamen. The second would be King Ferdinand of Spain for being Queen Isabella's husband and sending Christopher Columbus on his missions to the New World. The third would King Ferdinand's son-in-law King Henry VIII, although we Americans think the number eight had something to do with the amount of wives he had--that were six, not eight--not the line of Henrys the preceded him. Generally, we know nothing about England's other seven King Henrys. The fourth would be King James for writing the Bible and for Jamestown. Lastly, we know of King George and the American Revolution, although very few American could tell you that it was George the Third, as opposed to any of the other five Georges. Yet, he is the king who is in many ways directly responsible for who we are today, though not in a way which he would approve. Nevertheless, because of his long reign, the fate of many nations would undergo an incredible transformation. His legacy would be consistently redefined he would be lovingly called `Farmer George,' angrily called a tyrant spelled out in the American Declaration of Independence, and mockingly called the `Mad Monarch' due to a life time battle with mental illness.
Hibbert captures all of this in his book. He tells the story of a very powerful but dysfunctional family in the eighteenth century British Royals. When the young prince was born his father, the Prince of Wales, and his grandfather, King George II, were not in speaking terms to state it mildly.
Royal families, like most families, find that such dysfunction works in circles carrying down the generations. As the Prince of Wales, King George II was in consistent disagreement with King George I. When Fredrick, the Prince of Wales, dies in 1751 and new young prince--Fredrick's son, George, was granted the traditional Prince of Wales title, the dysfunction continued. As the King, George III would prove no better a father to his heir; struggling with his son for decades as his own Prince of Wales would continue to disappoint him.
"His grandfather, the King, took little interest in Prince George's progress. He nominated him a Knight of the Garter soon after his eleventh birthday; but he did so only because he was advised that he would be harshly criticized by the Opposition for the neglect if he did not, and he seems not to have answered Prince George's respectful and dutiful letter of thanks for the honour, merely sending it on to one of his Secretaries of State." p.11
Hibbert describes a monarch who accepts the concept of constitutional monarchy, the king's power having legal limits, but is determined to use the powers that are rightfully his. Growing up, he was closer to his mother and the Dowager Princess of Wales would instruct he son to `be a king' not to reign but to rule. The King would rule long enough to see all that he believed in challenged both at home by Charles Fox, in his colonies by the American Revolutionaries, and across the English Channel by French Revolutionaries who deposed his hated rival King Louis XVI claiming that they would bring an end to monarchy. This would unite the monarchs of Europe like never before, King George would even go out of his way to help the Jacobite pretender, the Cardinal Henry Stuart.
"He was well aware that theoretically nothing in either the Bill of Rights of 1689 or the 1701 Act of Settlement stood in the way of his declaring war, nominating peers, appointing bishops and summoning or dissolving Parliament. But in practice he was constrained from doing so, since the Civil List Act of 1698 was intended to give the monarchy finances enough only for the Court and the civil service. It was Parliament which voted money each year for the Army and Navy and for servicing the national debt. The King, therefore, needed Parliament's approval of his Government, and he soon came to realize that his undoubted power of appointing Ministers was qualified by the necessity of gaining parliamentary support for their measures. That requirement was not, however, such a restriction as might have been expected, since there was a widespread belief that any King's Minister ought to be given a fair chance to prove himself and since the existence of a large `court party' of office-holders in both Houses of Parliament ensured that the resignation of a First Minister was rarely brought about by parliamentary defeat." p.76-7
However there is also a very human side to this famous king, he was in person very kind and charitable, he gave a great deal of his personnel funds to help those in need, and he could very forgiving to those had wronged him, even those who a tried to kill him.
In government, the King believed that the monarch should be beyond politics. Unfortunately, the King also felt that he should govern directly as he felt strong monarch should. Thus you have a contradiction for one cannot act in a political manner and remain apolitical***. He saw criticism of him as an attack on the state itself and any attack on the state to be an attack on him. This attitude would help drive colonists in America towards more permanent solution to their problems with Britain by declaring George a tyrant and unfit to rule them. The American Revolution broke the spirit of the old King, five years after he would have to battle to regain his senses when he lost control of his mind in 1789. He recovered but would have to battle mental illness attacks for the rest of his life.
King George III left a strange legacy. He was neither a bad person nor a terrible king. Nevertheless, his legacy in America is one tyranny that led to the independence of the United States; and his legacy in Britain as the `Mad Monarch' would led to a tradition of the monarch being, although powerful on paper, a ceremonial figurehead who reigns but does not rule--the exact opposite of what King George wanted--and government ministers who would govern from and be responsible to the House of Commons in Parliament.
*That is republican with the little `r,' politically I am a moderate left-leaning Democrat, I refer to republican as one who supports having a Republic as the best form of government.
**Technically, he was not the last king of France but essentially monarchy, as it existed, did end with his reign.
***Interestingly, the way George III viewed the monarchy is the same way George Washington view the American presidency. That is my personal view not that of the author.
October 18, 2013
A very entertaining biography, although the times and people of King George III are far back in history. It is interesting to see how much more approachable were public figures in those times, and the King made no exeption, despite the different attempted assassination he went through. He was even used to pop, unannounced, into his subjects' homes in Windsor as well as in Celtenham, where he occasionally went for periods of cure. After a "promising start", as states the title of a chapter of the book, his reign was not an easy one. Amongst the major afflictions of George III were certainly the withdrawal of the American Territories from the Crown, the often turbolent relationship between himself and the Parliament, let alone the one with his eldest son, the future George IV. Despite this, the only really sad chapter of the book is the one regarding the King's daughters, their secluded girlhood, and the effect of that seclusion on the rest of their lives. The King went through alternate periods of high popularity and unpolularity; his reign was though the first one to be celebrated by a jubilee, in 1809, very much partecipatd by all kind of people and held just in time before the last and definitive worsening of his mental illness. George III managed to turn it into a kind of "creative" or maybe provocative lunacy, considering dead people still living, sometimes also talking to them, and considering passed away people who were still alive, occasionally including himself in this last category. He referred to some pieces of music that he liked "when he was in the world" and sometimes wore his mourning clothes "in memory of George III, for he was a good man".
November 29, 2009
Christopher Hibbert has once again produced a well researched account of another interesting and great man. Following on from Nelson and Wellington comes this very readable biography of the English King, George III. I'm not too sure what sort of reception this book will receive in the United States where I take it he was not so well liked in his time but its a very enjoyable book and offers a very interesting and detailed look at, by all accounts, a popular King.
The book took a little to get into but after a few chapters it was becoming one of those books that you find hard to put down. The author covers every facet of George III's life including his family, politics, social life and his madness. The King appears to have been a very kind and considerate Monach and took great interest in his subjects and the humanities. Its a great yarn and I'm sure that readers both sides of the Atlantic will enjoy the story.
September 1, 2014
Overall, I find one thing interesting about George III - the fact that he went insane. Otherwise, he's a rather dull figure, a family man, a dutiful monarch, favored conservatives in politics, and he loved his wife and his fifteen(!) children. Altogether, this picture makes the first half of his life (and this book) somewhat boring to read about. I was so grateful to finally reach the point of George's declining sanity (and the antics of his children) and I wish the author had gone into more detail about it. An interesting read, but this biography fails to really delve into the character of George III and skims over the last ten years of his life.
February 5, 2012
As the longest reigning king in Britain's history (only Victoria and Elizabeth II have reigned longer) George III, often known as the Mad King or the King that Lost America.
But there were many other things about George III that are revealed in this biography, for example his love of books and the arts.
There are also the problems he had with his numerous children, 15 in all, 13 of whom survived to adulthood!
This book is an extremely in depth and well-written account of his life and manages not to drag on.
But there were many other things about George III that are revealed in this biography, for example his love of books and the arts.
There are also the problems he had with his numerous children, 15 in all, 13 of whom survived to adulthood!
This book is an extremely in depth and well-written account of his life and manages not to drag on.
November 24, 2010
A readable biography of George III. As a "personal history" it's very limited in scope, focusing tightly on the king's character, interests, and of course his health issues - namely his horrific suffering from porphyria. The book only touches on the politics of the era and on the momentous events of his reign, such as the American Revolution and the war with France.
The author does give a short summary of the character and fate of each of his children. This was not a happy family.
The author does give a short summary of the character and fate of each of his children. This was not a happy family.
June 27, 2013
A delightful, easy-to-read biography of George III. Hibbert's work, as always, is well-researched, and the sections on the king's relationships with family members is especially interesting. However, if you are looking for an in-depth examination of George III's life and reign, you won't find it here. I would consider this bio, a fluff read - which is sometimes exactly what you want. This book would also be a great book for those just beginning to explore Georgian or Regency England.
September 12, 2013
I enjoy a biography that gets to the point and stays on it; not too much fluff. And Hibbert does not disappoint. Whenever I use to hear the name George III I always thought of the madness of King George. But this book paints him in a different light showing who he really was. I think he should have made more of a one sentence mention on the Queens death. Its a good book for Revolutionary War buffs or British history buffs.
December 7, 2015
This was an okay read. The one thing I didn't care for was that the author didn't "tell a chronological story". He handled separate parts of his lives chronologically. So, for example, he had a chapter on his sons. A chapter on his daughters. Many chapters on his illness.
But that technique made it seem rather disjointed. And it was informative, but not an enjoyable read.
But that technique made it seem rather disjointed. And it was informative, but not an enjoyable read.
November 7, 2008
King George is not the jerk we all think him to be. He was a loving family man who was driven mad by an ailment that basically took his brain and major functions away. He cared about his country and the people in it but the colonists didn't give him a chance.
March 19, 2009
I picked this up for research for my final in a college English class. Hibbert's writing made it easy to pick up the book and just read. I suppose the purpose of a biography is to detail a life, but this book really humanized George as a man. Good stuff.
November 16, 2010
I really enjoyed this book. This is the first british author I've read whom shows blatant contempt for the American Revolution which was quite laughable, but perhaps he was trying to convey George III and the parliament's feelings toward it. Overall, a very informative biography.
April 6, 2010
Well-written and very readable. George III was a humble man of integrity. He grieved over the loss of America. He struggled with mental illness and sons who gave him trouble.
November 26, 2010
Only got through a chapter, it was just for my husband's research, he ended up reading it on his own.
August 27, 2011
I was looking for more dirt.
August 28, 2012
Great content but rather dull for such an interesting figure in history.
December 5, 2015
A basic poorly written book about a useless king. A great reason to do away with monarchy. Pass on this book.
December 8, 2016
A sympathetic portrayal of George III, well researched and well written. A thoroughly enjoyable book I would recommend.
January 5, 2009
I actually listened to the audiobook - unabriged!
July 29, 2015
This puts a face on someone that popular history may have relegated to insanity.
March 17, 2018
To someone born in the USA, King George III of the United Kingdom was our first focus of national hate; the tyrant that compelled us to rebel, break away from what was then the most powerful empire in the world and seek independence as a sovereign nation. This has been our real only knowledge of the man, and king, for most of the last two hundred and forty years. I don't think we even knew he suffered from madness until the movie, The Madness of King George, came out in 1998.
Yet, the image that emerges through the pages of this fine book by Christopher Hibbert, is of a conscientious, hard-working, sincerely caring monarch who was interested in everything from architecture and science to the common farmers he regularly spoke to on his rambles through the country.
Energetic, engaged, intelligent and a prolific writer he, nonetheless, suffered incredible physical pain and emotional anguish from -apparently - porphyry, a fractious Parliament, the inexplicable loss of his American possessions and strained family relationships.
Hibbert draws extensively from the extraordinary volume of correspondence that has been preserved from his long reign. Much of this is part of the 350,000 page Georgian Papers Programme online and available to the public.
Fascinating details emerge, giving context to well known facts. For example, the British Army was over extended with troops on the continent, in India and in the Americas. There was enough resistance from Parliament and the people to keep home troops at home. If they had been utilized in the war the result may have been completely different.
I also can't help but speculate that if the king had travelled to the American colonies at the right time his ability to charm may have avoided the breach. As it was he never travelled beyond the shores of the British Isles.
Of particular interest was the medical treatment he received at the hands of the top physicians in the realm at the time. The state of knowledge and practice was little changed from medieval times and what he was subjected to was little more than slightly better than the illness he suffered.
Hibbert documents the king's life in chronological order from his promising youth, his devoted marriage to his plain but increasingly irritable wife, Charlotte, his struggles with his largely intractable sons and his adoration of his six daughters.
In time he rightly gained the love and respect of the nation.
Hibberd's style is lucid, accessible and satisfyingly readable. This book helps to give George III the rightful place he deserves in history. A must read about one of the most important British monarchs who ever lived.
Yet, the image that emerges through the pages of this fine book by Christopher Hibbert, is of a conscientious, hard-working, sincerely caring monarch who was interested in everything from architecture and science to the common farmers he regularly spoke to on his rambles through the country.
Energetic, engaged, intelligent and a prolific writer he, nonetheless, suffered incredible physical pain and emotional anguish from -apparently - porphyry, a fractious Parliament, the inexplicable loss of his American possessions and strained family relationships.
Hibbert draws extensively from the extraordinary volume of correspondence that has been preserved from his long reign. Much of this is part of the 350,000 page Georgian Papers Programme online and available to the public.
Fascinating details emerge, giving context to well known facts. For example, the British Army was over extended with troops on the continent, in India and in the Americas. There was enough resistance from Parliament and the people to keep home troops at home. If they had been utilized in the war the result may have been completely different.
I also can't help but speculate that if the king had travelled to the American colonies at the right time his ability to charm may have avoided the breach. As it was he never travelled beyond the shores of the British Isles.
Of particular interest was the medical treatment he received at the hands of the top physicians in the realm at the time. The state of knowledge and practice was little changed from medieval times and what he was subjected to was little more than slightly better than the illness he suffered.
Hibbert documents the king's life in chronological order from his promising youth, his devoted marriage to his plain but increasingly irritable wife, Charlotte, his struggles with his largely intractable sons and his adoration of his six daughters.
In time he rightly gained the love and respect of the nation.
Hibberd's style is lucid, accessible and satisfyingly readable. This book helps to give George III the rightful place he deserves in history. A must read about one of the most important British monarchs who ever lived.
June 21, 2018
I was passed this book by my mum and I have to confess that before reading I couldn't quite place where abouts George III fell in our Royal timeline and couldn't tell you anything about him other than he was possibly mad at some point (I knew one of the George's had been but alas couldn't tell you which one).
Well having read the book I can confirm he was 'the mad one' and he fits in between 1738-1820 to be precise. Yet Hibbert expertly illustrates why George III was so much more than simply the mad King. He was a patron of the arts and sciences owning one of the largest collections of books of his time, he was intelligent and a kind devoted husband.
Did you know he was the King reviled in the Declaration of Independence? Did you know he was the first monarch to live in Buckingham Palace (or Queens House as it was then known)? I certainly didn't and was fascinated to read about the grandfather of Queen Victoria and a period of history I was more unfamiliar with than I realised. It was refreshing to read about a monarch other than Henry VIII or Victoria (as interesting and brilliant as they were).
I found the book to be very well written by Hibbert, who verged just on the right side of depth without drowning the reader in names, dates and places. He vividly brought George III to life although I would now like to read more about the coming about of the Declaration of Independence as the King in Hibbert's account does not seem recognisable to the King so despised by Americans of that time.
Overall, whilst it's not a breeze to read the 400 pages, it is well worth the effort. I came away far more knowledgeable and didn't feel like I was pulling teeth in the process which I can so often feel like with books of this genre.
If you liked this one Hibbert has also written a personal history of Queen Victoria, or for something a bit different try Scotland the Autobiography short sharp snippets of diary entries, newspaper articles and interviews unlike any other history book I have read.
Well having read the book I can confirm he was 'the mad one' and he fits in between 1738-1820 to be precise. Yet Hibbert expertly illustrates why George III was so much more than simply the mad King. He was a patron of the arts and sciences owning one of the largest collections of books of his time, he was intelligent and a kind devoted husband.
Did you know he was the King reviled in the Declaration of Independence? Did you know he was the first monarch to live in Buckingham Palace (or Queens House as it was then known)? I certainly didn't and was fascinated to read about the grandfather of Queen Victoria and a period of history I was more unfamiliar with than I realised. It was refreshing to read about a monarch other than Henry VIII or Victoria (as interesting and brilliant as they were).
I found the book to be very well written by Hibbert, who verged just on the right side of depth without drowning the reader in names, dates and places. He vividly brought George III to life although I would now like to read more about the coming about of the Declaration of Independence as the King in Hibbert's account does not seem recognisable to the King so despised by Americans of that time.
Overall, whilst it's not a breeze to read the 400 pages, it is well worth the effort. I came away far more knowledgeable and didn't feel like I was pulling teeth in the process which I can so often feel like with books of this genre.
If you liked this one Hibbert has also written a personal history of Queen Victoria, or for something a bit different try Scotland the Autobiography short sharp snippets of diary entries, newspaper articles and interviews unlike any other history book I have read.
September 23, 2020
This is my first book by Hibbert. His biography of George III is an easy read (most of the time). It dragged in a few places but the narrative was able to become unstuck with little difficulty. Hibbert does an excellent job of putting the reader in the same room as King George. One of the hallmarks of a good historian is to show the reader the life events that mold and form the subject that is being studied. In this, Hibbert is able to guide the reader through George's stormy relationship with his father (Prince of Whales) and grandfather (King George II); his monogamous and faithful marriage to Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz; his own quarrels with his enormous brood of children; and his thrice decent into madness. It is this last subject that is so interesting and pitiful. While there were many moments of levity and happiness in George's life it seems as if everything is darkened by his periodic bouts of insanity. The King became so helpless when he lost his mind that one cannot help but feel an overwhelming sense of remorse and pity. The worst of it was his final years where, incurably mad, the King had to also contend with being blind and deaf - locked away into a world that only he could experience. It must have been very lonely for him at the end.
I was very much impressed with Hibbert's ability to introduce me to this area of British History. I look forward to reading his two volume biography on George III's prodigal son, George IV.
I was very much impressed with Hibbert's ability to introduce me to this area of British History. I look forward to reading his two volume biography on George III's prodigal son, George IV.
September 18, 2023
This is a thoroughly entertaining, somewhat gossipy biography of George III, from his birth until, more or less, his death. Be warned: this is no academic's biography. Hibbert is obviously very fond of his subject, giving short shrift to the King's foes and flaws (although he has definitely done his homework). The Whigs are not painted as champions of democracy or abolition, but usually as self-interested hypocrites; George's sons are sketched condescendingly as buffoons or failures to launch, with the Prince of Wales emerging suddenly and bewilderingly as a capable Regent in the last few pages of the book. The structure of the book is imperfect, to be sure -- the narrative loses steam over its last several chapters, which become shorter and short vignettes as the King himself fails in health, and there is an over-reliance on long footnotes at the end of the these chapters which seem like they could have simply been included in the main text. However, as what it is -- a fun, fond, and opinionated look at George III and his world -- this book is fully deserving of four stars. Just remember to pair it with more balanced biographies of the principals.
July 24, 2017
Britain's King George the Third had a great deal to contend with: the loss of the North American colonies, wars with France, his parliaments, his own sons' wayward behaviour, and so on. On top of this, he had to cope with worrying bouts of mental instability that rendered him incapable of ruling his country for long periods, including the latter part of his long life.
Christopher Hibbert conveys all of this and more in a well-researched and highly readable book with easily digestible short chapters. He portrays the King as a good, if somewhat conservative, ruler of his kingdom. My only 'gripe' is that there was insufficient discussion of the possible medical causes of the famous 'madness' of George III.
As with other books that Hibbert has written, this volume makes for enjoyable and informative reading.
Christopher Hibbert conveys all of this and more in a well-researched and highly readable book with easily digestible short chapters. He portrays the King as a good, if somewhat conservative, ruler of his kingdom. My only 'gripe' is that there was insufficient discussion of the possible medical causes of the famous 'madness' of George III.
As with other books that Hibbert has written, this volume makes for enjoyable and informative reading.
August 26, 2023
George III is a thorough biography of a King who would see two tumultuous events throughout the British empire including the American Revolution and the wars against Napoleon (including the war of 1812 with the United States). While this book does account world events it is more of a personal look at the man and his family. For a period of time he was declared insane and restrained via straight jacket although eventually recovering to rule again. He had a rocky relationship with his wife, children and brothers. This book looks at all the areas of why those relationships were so troubled and what happened to each child. Overall if you are looking for a political or military book about Brtiain during this time you may want to try something else but if you are interested in the person and the royal family it is well done. It is a little on the long side in parts but still a good read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews