Richard the Lionheart by John Gillingham

In recent years it has become fashionable to claim that a whole roster of historical luminaries were actually gay – William Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, so on and so forth – and thus, any similar conjectures about Richard can possibly be dismissed as being in the same tabloid-exposé vein. This includes “exonerating” him from any “accusations” about his sexuality and setting the record (so to speak) straight. Writing a sympathetic and informed work on the king at a time when Richard’s reputation had become quite tarnished thanks to irresponsible scholarship, I feel as if it was necessary for Gillingham to rehabilitate Richard further.

John Gillingham, author of one of the best Richard biographies, unfortunately falls into this trap. This then becomes a way to “prove” that he was gay or straight, which then become reflections of the author’s sociopolitical feelings and their need for Richard to be one or the other, regardless of the actual evidence. Insofar as Richard is granted any depth at all, people tend to focus on his contested sexuality.

Yesterday, we learned about Richard the Lionheart and some of the reasons why he’s a misunderstood and underappreciated historical figure who deserves to be represented as he truly was, instead of a growing trend that continues to generally and pointlessly demonize him as a religious fanatic only interested in gruesomely killing people (if you read my post, you’ll realize why both of these are very incorrect). Scholarly Saturday: Richard the Lionheart and 12th-Century Sex Scandals

Richard the Lionheart by John Gillingham