The Wars of the Roses
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £9.50
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in The Wars of the Roses for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £9.50, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
"All readers interested in late medieval history will appreciate this."--Brian Renvall, "Library Journal"--Brian Renvall "Library Journal "
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
The author makes it clear in the preface that this is a book about the causes of the War. The jacket too hints at this, but also states that the book "gives a clear account of the course of events".
Such clear account of the course of events as it does give is not, in my view, of sufficient thoroughness to be of value to a reader without having already gained a good knowledge of the period. Here you will not get a detailed history of the War - with all the facts, events and personalities. You will not get how the battles were played out; you will not get any significant detail on the personalities, their character or how they came to be involved; you will get no life history, even briefly, on key figures like Warwick and York and characters such as Hastings, Oxford, Morton and others are mentioned little and often only in passing; even Richard III is not given enough coverage so that we might learn more of what made him what he was. Instead the narrative stumbles into momentous events without preamble and were often dealt with in a sentence. Thus was the death of York, similarly Warwick's demise; even the death of the Princes is given no analysis of any substance. Characters appear with no introduction and the assumption is clear - you need to already know about them.
Given that this is a book about causes and only about causes, does it shape up?
I suffered with two main difficulties. Firstly, the author seemed a bit obsessed with compartmentalising everything. There are plenty of occasions where he sets out to list points - three reasons for that, six phases of the other, two causes for this etc., etc. The difficulty I found, though, was that I had to read and re-read what followed to gain a clear understanding of what exactly the three reasons, six phases or two causes actually were. They are not clearly spelled out but are covered, if they are covered at all, by a plethora of seemingly unrelated points that the reader is left to try to knit together into some kind of understandable sequence. Another consequence of this compartmentalisation is that the narrative is not chronological; always a weakness in a history book in my view. The sequence in which events occur is always part of the explanation of why they occurred at all. Even the layout of the chapters seemed to me confused.
Secondly, I found the writing style mildly archaic and quite difficult in parts to follow. There were several sentences that I must have read three or four times before understanding the meaning. There was more than one sentence that I gave up on. I could not be certain whether the unusual use of English was the cause of this or whether there might have been a misprint; because, unfortunately, there are several misprints.
I accept that my problem with this book is that I am not an academic. I did know a reasonable amount about the period and had I not done so, I do not think I could have coped. But I bought this book thinking it would advance my knowledge, but as a hobby historian only, and not academically tutored in history, it did not meet this objective. This book is definitely not for the hobby historian. For someone studying at a high level, I presume this book is of some value. It is for this reason only that I give it three stars rather than a miserly one.
In my view this is definitely not a book you can easily read for pleasure. I managed to finish it, but I am not sure how much I really learned from it.
Such clear account of the course of events as it does give is not, in my view, of sufficient thoroughness to be of value to a reader without having already gained a good knowledge of the period. Here you will not get a detailed history of the War - with all the facts, events and personalities. You will not get how the battles were played out; you will not get any significant detail on the personalities, their character or how they came to be involved; you will get no life history, even briefly, on key figures like Warwick and York and characters such as Hastings, Oxford, Morton and others are mentioned little and often only in passing; even Richard III is not given enough coverage so that we might learn more of what made him what he was. Instead the narrative stumbles into momentous events without preamble and were often dealt with in a sentence. Thus was the death of York, similarly Warwick's demise; even the death of the Princes is given no analysis of any substance. Characters appear with no introduction and the assumption is clear - you need to already know about them.
Given that this is a book about causes and only about causes, does it shape up?
I suffered with two main difficulties. Firstly, the author seemed a bit obsessed with compartmentalising everything. There are plenty of occasions where he sets out to list points - three reasons for that, six phases of the other, two causes for this etc., etc. The difficulty I found, though, was that I had to read and re-read what followed to gain a clear understanding of what exactly the three reasons, six phases or two causes actually were. They are not clearly spelled out but are covered, if they are covered at all, by a plethora of seemingly unrelated points that the reader is left to try to knit together into some kind of understandable sequence. Another consequence of this compartmentalisation is that the narrative is not chronological; always a weakness in a history book in my view. The sequence in which events occur is always part of the explanation of why they occurred at all. Even the layout of the chapters seemed to me confused.
Secondly, I found the writing style mildly archaic and quite difficult in parts to follow. There were several sentences that I must have read three or four times before understanding the meaning. There was more than one sentence that I gave up on. I could not be certain whether the unusual use of English was the cause of this or whether there might have been a misprint; because, unfortunately, there are several misprints.
I accept that my problem with this book is that I am not an academic. I did know a reasonable amount about the period and had I not done so, I do not think I could have coped. But I bought this book thinking it would advance my knowledge, but as a hobby historian only, and not academically tutored in history, it did not meet this objective. This book is definitely not for the hobby historian. For someone studying at a high level, I presume this book is of some value. It is for this reason only that I give it three stars rather than a miserly one.
In my view this is definitely not a book you can easily read for pleasure. I managed to finish it, but I am not sure how much I really learned from it.
5 of 8 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
Michael Hicks's excellent book does not give a "blow by blow" account of the wars, nor does he describe most of the events that take place -- there are plenty of other works that cover these matters more than adequately. Hicks, however, gives the best (and dare one say most "objective"?) view of the conflict that I have come across so far. Above all he avoids the pitfall of accepting the view of the Yorkist chroniclists, whose anti-Lancastrian propaganda has dominated so many historians' view of the period. The book is highly recommended for students, historians and the general public who want a balanced view of the wars up to the Tudor victory.
0 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
Michael Hicks excels in his specialist period of expertise in this comprehensive, concise and perhaps somewhat controversial work in which he challenges many long-held assumptions about the key figures and events in the Wars of the Roses, and demonstrates how some of these have their origins in Yorkist propaganda.
Were the wars until 1460 truly a dynastic struggle? Contemporaries did not think so, and until this time, Hicks shows the Yorkist faction stated that their main aim was political reform. Was Richard of York treated `harshly' by Henry VI? Not if you count escaping execution and being pardoned for treason four times as harsh.
This was indeed the case with Richard of York, who rebelled and raised arms against the King no less than 4 times between 1450 and 1459, and on at least two occasions his forces physically attacked the King's retinue. All of these were treasonable acts according to the law, so Richard was guilty of treason several times over, yet was pardoned in exchange for his oath of allegiance or capitulation.
In this regard King Henry was incredibly lenient towards York, but they Yorkists did not extend that magnanimity towards their rivals. As Hicks demonstrates they adopted a policy of eliminating their rivals in battles, skirmishes and even peacetime. The `battles' in which noblemen opposed to York were amongst the only casualties are testament to this.
Hicks also raises some intriguing issues surrounding Richard of York's title and claim to the throne, by demonstrating that there was not one single `right' or `true' system of succession in 15th century England, but rather several different systems, that could favour both York and Lancaster. He also shows how the circumstances in the infamous parliament of 1460 ensured that they were bound to favour York's claim.
What fascinated me the most was how Hicks succinctly demonstrated that the view of Henry IV's reign and usurpation that has existed since the time of Shakespeare and before is very much influenced by Yorkist spin, which is still prevalent today. All too often the Yorkists are viewed as the victims of Tudor propaganda, but few realise that House of York were all too were masterful in deployment of such propaganda for their own ends, which still colours our view of the Lancastrians today.
It cuts through simplistic and 'black and white' interpretations of this period in which the Yorkists are the `goodies' and the Lancastrians seen as the `baddies' by revealing the complexity of the politics of the age in which all sides were often equally immoral and dishonourable in their conduct. The author is not `pro' Lancastrian that I can see, and he is more then willing to criticise this side, but uses the same measure for the Yorkists. Hence this book is more balanced then many on the subject.
This book is `scholarly' but I did not find it nearly as hard going as many such books (as a History student I read a lot of them) and the author's method of breaking up long chapters into shorter sections under their own headings made the book a lot more readable. Overall this was an excellent and fascinating and challenging work that I find to be more balanced than most.
Were the wars until 1460 truly a dynastic struggle? Contemporaries did not think so, and until this time, Hicks shows the Yorkist faction stated that their main aim was political reform. Was Richard of York treated `harshly' by Henry VI? Not if you count escaping execution and being pardoned for treason four times as harsh.
This was indeed the case with Richard of York, who rebelled and raised arms against the King no less than 4 times between 1450 and 1459, and on at least two occasions his forces physically attacked the King's retinue. All of these were treasonable acts according to the law, so Richard was guilty of treason several times over, yet was pardoned in exchange for his oath of allegiance or capitulation.
In this regard King Henry was incredibly lenient towards York, but they Yorkists did not extend that magnanimity towards their rivals. As Hicks demonstrates they adopted a policy of eliminating their rivals in battles, skirmishes and even peacetime. The `battles' in which noblemen opposed to York were amongst the only casualties are testament to this.
Hicks also raises some intriguing issues surrounding Richard of York's title and claim to the throne, by demonstrating that there was not one single `right' or `true' system of succession in 15th century England, but rather several different systems, that could favour both York and Lancaster. He also shows how the circumstances in the infamous parliament of 1460 ensured that they were bound to favour York's claim.
What fascinated me the most was how Hicks succinctly demonstrated that the view of Henry IV's reign and usurpation that has existed since the time of Shakespeare and before is very much influenced by Yorkist spin, which is still prevalent today. All too often the Yorkists are viewed as the victims of Tudor propaganda, but few realise that House of York were all too were masterful in deployment of such propaganda for their own ends, which still colours our view of the Lancastrians today.
It cuts through simplistic and 'black and white' interpretations of this period in which the Yorkists are the `goodies' and the Lancastrians seen as the `baddies' by revealing the complexity of the politics of the age in which all sides were often equally immoral and dishonourable in their conduct. The author is not `pro' Lancastrian that I can see, and he is more then willing to criticise this side, but uses the same measure for the Yorkists. Hence this book is more balanced then many on the subject.
This book is `scholarly' but I did not find it nearly as hard going as many such books (as a History student I read a lot of them) and the author's method of breaking up long chapters into shorter sections under their own headings made the book a lot more readable. Overall this was an excellent and fascinating and challenging work that I find to be more balanced than most.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
