I think this is a question about the history of history, or how history has (sometimes) been tied into the narratives people choose to tell / need at a point in time.
When I was in school, Richard the Lionheart was taught to me as a brave crusader, noble knight but an absent king, who abandoned England to the ruinous charge of his younger brother John.
I now realise thats rather simplistic. After all, Richard was also in line for the Duchy of Aquitaine, and spent a fair amount of time there (not least building the Saucy Castle, a name I love!).
So how did we get here? How did the history get written that Richard is an absent king? Or, and this may be more apposite, who's responsible?
Edit: spelling / grammar
"Absent" is quite reasonable. Richard was fighting in France against his own father Henry II. This was the third time that Henry II's sons had revolted against him (the first two led by Henry the Young King, oldest son of Henry II and Eleanor, with Richard fighting alongside his older brother Henry the Young King against their father in the first, and alongside his father against his brother in the second). In the third revolt, Richard was allied with Philip II of France, and on 4th July 1189 they caught Henry II's army and forced Henry's surrender - the terms included recognising Richard as his heir. At the time, Henry was so ill he could barely sit on his horse, and Richard only had to wait 2 days before his father died and he inherited his titles. Later in July, Richard was invested as the Duke of Normandy.
Next, Richard returned to England for his coronation, held in September. He had already been planning for his upcoming crusading, and was not in England long. Richard's crusade started in mid-1190 (three years after Richard had taken the cross), and much of his activity in England consisted of raising money for the crusade.
Richard's first major stop on the crusade was Sicily, spending late 1190 and early 1191, mostly fighting his cousin Tancred. Sicily was under Norman rule, and Tancred had usurped power rather than let it pass to the rightful heir, Queen Joan, widow of William II of Sicily, and also Richard's sister. Richard's family business arguments took priority over crusading (his earlier fighting against his father in France, and now his cousin in Sicily). After a treaty with Tancred in which Tancred kept Sicily, Joan (who had been imprisoned by Tancred) was free, and compensated 20,000 ounces of gold (about 1/2 ton) for the loss of her inheritance, Richard left for the Holy Land.
Next stop: Cyprus. Acre had been the plan, but Richard's fleet was dispersed in a storm, and Richard's sister Joan, his new fiancee, and his treasure ship had been captured by the Emperor of Cyprus (Isaac Komnenos, who laid claim to the Byzantine throne - unsuccessfully, accounting for him being Emperor of Cyprus rather than the Byzantine Emperor). Thus, Richard went to Cyprus instead of Acre, and spent a month conquering the island. Halfway through the conquest, he married his fiancee, Berengaria, the oldest daughter of Sancho VI of Navarre.
Next, Acre and the crusade proper! A year later, the crusade turned back, within sight of Jerusalem. Richard negotiated with Saladin, and set off back for England in late 1192. Alas, his ship was wrecked in the Adriatic, and Richard continued on land, to be captured by Leopold of Austria near the end of 1192. He was soon handed over to Holy Roman Emperor Henry VI as his prisoner. The ransom was high. Others were interested in Richard remaining a prisoner, and bribes were supposedly offered to Henry VI by Philip II of France and Richard's brother John to keep Richard prisoner until late 1194. But Henry got his ransom for Richard, 100,000 pounds of silver, and released Richard in early 1194.
A month later, Richard was back in England, for a second coronation on 17th April 1194. But not for long, because war with France demanded his attention. Richard began his reconquest of Normandy from Philip II. He was still fighting in France when he was wounded by a crossbow on 26th March 1199, dying of infection less than two weeks later.
Time spent in England as king: less than a year of his 10 year reign, for his coronations and fund-raising for the crusade. "Absent" seems quite justified. He did spend time in England before becoming king, with his longest single residence being the first 8 years of his life. After that, his continental titles and responsibilities gave him good reason to spend time away from England.