Non-fiction: The History of King Richard III

Overview
Thomas More's The History of King Richard III, composed around 1513 in English, presents a vivid and unambiguous portrait of Richard of Gloucester as a usurper and villain. Written by a humanist who served at Henry VIII's court, the narrative functions as both a chronicle and a polemic: it explains and justifies the Tudor succession while castigating the Yorkist regime. The prose aims for immediacy and moral clarity, offering readers a drama of ambition, treachery, and divine retribution rather than a detached annalistic record.

Content and tone
The narrative follows Richard's rise from shrewd operator to ruler who allegedly arranges the murder of rivals, most notoriously the young princes in the Tower. Scenes are dramatized and often lurid: betrayals, executions, and speeches that expose supposed cruelty and calculating temperament. More employs rhetorical devices drawn from humanist training, character sketches, dialogues, and pointed moral judgments, to shape Richard into an emblem of vice. The work leans heavily on rumor, contemporary testimony, and Tudor-friendly accounts, favoring dramatic illustration over dispassionate proof.

Purpose and perspective
The text serves an obvious political purpose: to legitimate Tudor rule by delegitimizing the prior dynasty. More's depiction of Richard fits a broader Tudor narrative that required a monstrous predecessor to justify the new regime. That agenda colors selection and emphasis; episodes that highlight illegitimacy, greed, and sacrilege receive extended attention. Writing in the vernacular broadened the work's reach, turning a political justification into a popular moral tale about the dangers of tyranny and the restoration of rightful rule.

Literary character and style
More's prose blends historiography with courtroom rhetoric and dramatic flourish. Characters are sketched sharply and motives explained in moral terms, with the author often guiding readers toward clear verdicts on conduct and character. The narrative's immediacy and theatricality made it especially influential for later writers, who borrowed episodes and dialogue lines that helped turn political history into compelling drama. The moralizing tone and memorable images, especially the portrait of Richard as malformed and malevolent, resonated powerfully in Tudor culture.

Influence and legacy
The account shaped Tudor historiography and public perception of Richard III for centuries. Chroniclers and dramatists, most notably William Shakespeare, drew on More's imagery and anecdotes, perpetuating the view of Richard as a ruthless usurper. The narrative's authority grew because it was both accessible and consonant with official Tudor memory, so its portrayals entered education, theater, and popular imagination, becoming the dominant template for understanding the late Plantagenet crisis.

Criticism and historical reassessment
Modern historians treat More's History as a crucial but biased source. Its reliance on hearsay and partisan testimony, coupled with a clear propagandistic aim, makes it problematic as a straightforward factual account. Archaeological and documentary research has prompted re-evaluation of specific claims, most famously debates over Richard's physical appearance and the fate of the princes, while acknowledging the work's power as a window into Tudor ideology. The History remains indispensable for understanding how early Tudor writers constructed political legitimacy and how narrative, rhetoric, and memory can shape the long-term image of a historical figure.