Richard the Lionheart

by John Gillingham

No monarch has generated more conflicting opinions, or demanded more effort from the historian attempting to disentangle myth from reality. John Gillingham contends that the popular views of Richard are false, that they are based upon legend and not upon evidence. Strip away the legend and look at the evidence, study Richard on his home ground in the turbulent Duchy of Aquitaine, and a new picture of Richard emerges. He is still the crusading knight and patron of troubadours, but he is also a capable ruler with a clear eye for political realities. Indeed, in the sheer breadth of his vision, in the ability not only to conceive great enterprises but also to carry them out, he (though no Englishman) was one of the ablest kings ever to sit upon the throne of England.

Genres: History, Biography, Medieval, Chivalry, Nonfiction, British Literature, Plantagenet

318 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1978

About the author

John Bennett Gillingham is emeritus professor of medieval history at the London School of Economics and Political Science. On the 19th July 2007 he was elected into the Fellowship of the British Academy

He is renowned as an expert on the Angevin empire.

Reviews

[Tony · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a first rate biography. Gillingham does a truly impressive job of piecing together Richard's life from the relatively scant evidence left to us. Moreover, he provides insightful analysis throughout. This book is the work of an exceptional historian at the top of his game.

[Peter Corrigan · Rating 4 out of 5]

My Amazon review on July 16, 2017: Excellent early history by a future 'star'!

Gee, the pressure of being the first reviewer! Altogether a solid effort and worth a 4-star. Maps and photos are good which is always critical (maps) and nice (photos) in a book of this sort. No photos of Richard sadly. This book was an early work (if not the first) of John Gillingham who later became renowned as a historian of the Angevin empire at the London School of Economics (and now a Fellow at the British Academy) , something I did not know until I was almost done.. His 'rookie' effort shows very well his early training as a historian. He makes every visible attempt to stick to the original sources, which are quite limited as it turns out. Hence revisionism does not seem to be his agenda whatsoever. He is forced to interpret and speculate somewhat, as all who write about this period must owing to the lacunae in the sources. But he is careful to explain his reasoning and thoughts leading to the conclusions and more importantly he does not try to unduly force modern thought values and interpretations onto the facts of the past as they were known. Perhaps the most clear example is the revisionist idea that Richard was a homosexual. Gillingham says that 'idea' was first raised in 1948 some 750 years after the death of Richard. He is on solid ground rejecting the idea based on the writing and use of language among the few sources from that time. The writing is a little dry in places as he seems to eschew describing the truly dramatic for what is actually known. He might have been able to infuse more drama without sacrificing historical accuracy, as these are some truly monumental events! For that slight weakness I removed a star. And the number of names and castles can be overwhelming. Not sure how you 'fix' that but is can be almost annoying.

[Rob Griffin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was very readable and informative. Lots of detail of Richard's wranglings against Phillip. For me there was just enough detail of his crusade and subsequent imprisonment. Overall I felt the momentum held so that I finished this feeling entertained and educated. Gillingham sums up by promoting Richard as a much greater king than conventional views have judged. I haven't read enough to know if this estimation is warranted but I loved the clear arguments. Well worth a read if your interested in English history.

[Joshua Horn · Rating 3 out of 5]

I skimmed a lot of this book, but it seemed like a solid account of a very interesting character. I did feel like certain parts could have gone into more detail. I read Richard I by Jacob Abbott to my kids. Now it isn't a scholarly book, but my impression Abbott tried to base it quite closely on the sources. I'm curious why there were some anecdotes that he included that Gillingham didn't even mention, even in discussing legends that grew up around Richard. Did Abbott verge into pure myth, or did Gillingham's scholarly milieu purge out some swashbuckling tales that should have been included?

[Jerome Otte · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid and entertaining biography of Richard.

The narrative is bit dry but very readable for the most part. Gillingham ably describes Richard’s relationship with his father and mother and how these helped contribute to his success. He also disputes the idea that Richard was a homosexual, and ably explains how Richard’s fame developed during his own time and beyond.

A clear, thorough and well-researched work.

[Andrew Dockrill · Rating 2 out of 5]

As a huge lover and defender of Richard the Lionheart I never turn down a chance to read about him and try to displace and rifle through the myths and legends of richard and find out what was most likely real and what was exaggerated. I have read a few books on Richard already, and his story is so enriching that I find it never gets old. This book however, while not bad, I found to skim and gloss over, or almost summerize I should say alot of the events of his life. John Gillingham wrote another book on Richard the Lionheart which I found more thorough and complete.

One thing in this book that was a bit of a letdown actually came at the beginning of the book where John Gillingham analyzed certain moments and events in Richards life and attempted to debunk them or find the truth in the situation, such as Richards eventual death at Chalus castle, and what Richards true intentions of even being at Chalus castle were - was he there for treasure? I quite liked how he did this and tried to make sense of the myth and reality of what most likely happened. But after a chapter who two, Gillingham simply stopped this approach, which was a bit of a letdown for me admittedly as it was a new approach to Richard I had never seen before and would have been quite interesting.

All in all, it wasn't bad, there was nothing new here but it was fun to revisit Medieval England and Normandy and to see the spoiled Henry the Younger, Philip Augustus, Louis VII and Henry II once again.

[Ralph Cortes · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to know a little more about him after reading some Crusades material back in college.

[Constantine]

paperback

[Marta · Rating 5 out of 5]

Es un libro exhaustivo centrado principalmente en las campañas de Ricardo Corazón de León: Inglaterra, Francia y Tierra Santa, cautiverio, y otra vez Inglaterra y Francia. También hace interesantes reflexiones sobre el gobierno y el carácter de Ricardo y sobre cómo lo veían sus amigos y enemigos.

Se lee muy bien, está bien escrito (o bien traducido) y los capítulos son cortos y centrados. Pero es principalmente un ensayo político (en el sentido de alianzas y guerras); así que te lo aconsejo si tienes mucho interés en el tema, si no, quizá sea más cómodo leer algo más divulgativo. Sí creo que las bibliotecas universitarias tendrían que tener un ejemplar al menos.

Como cabría esperar, incluye mapas, bibliografía, ilustraciones (en blanco y negro) e índice de nombres y el propio índice del libro es prácticamente un eje cronológico.

[John East · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this as a follow up to 1066, 1215 and William the Conqueror to try and get a better understanding of the time, place and events. The author doesn't just follow those who have written before him, but provides a somewhat different view of how Richard became a "legend in his lifetime" and one of the better kings of England. What I didn't realize until I read the book was how Richard looked at Normandy and England, the first which seemed to have his heart, and the second was almost a way of funding his wars in Normandy and other parts of France. The author also paints a pretty damning view of Count, later king, John, some of which seems to be backed up by the book 1215. Next up is Eleanor, the Aquitaine and the Four Kings.

[iosephvs bibliothecarivs · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful, authoritative biography of one of the great figures of medieval Europe. Highly readable and the maps included were essential for someone like me who knows next to nothing about French geography. My reading experience was enhanced by the opportunity I had to see a production of The Lion in Winter, James Goldman's play about Richard's family, while about halfway through.

[Justin · Rating 3 out of 5]

This highly credible history shines when focused on Richard's crusade, but lags elsewhere. The crusade section when taken in isolation is truly riveting reading.