What do you think?
Rate this book
King John, Henry III and England's Lost Civil War
In 1204, the great Angevin Empire created by the joining of the dynasties of Henry II of England and his queen, Eleanor of Aquitaine, was fragmenting. At its height, the family landholdings had been among the largest the world had ever seen. From the border of England and Scotland in the north to south of the Pyrenees, it seemed there was nowhere in Europe destined to escape Plantagenet control.
Yet within five years of his accession, King John's grip on the family holdings was loosening. Betrayal against his father and brother, the murder of his nephew, and breaking promises made to his supporters were just some of the accusations levelled against him. When Philip II conquered Normandy, the chroniclers believed that an ancient prophecy was fulfilled: that in this year the sword would be separated from the sceptre. For the first time since 1066, England's rule over the ancestral land was over.
For John, troubles on the continent were just the beginning of a series of challenges that would ultimately define his reign. Difficult relations with the papacy and clergy, coupled with rising dissent among his barons ensured conflict would not be limited to the continent. When John died in 1216, more than half of the country was in the hands of the dauphin of France. Never had the future of the Plantagenet dynasty looked more uncertain.
As the following pages will show, throughout the first eighteen years of the reign of Henry III, the future direction of England as a political state, the identity of the ruling family and the fate of Henry II's lost empire were still matters that could have gone either way. For the advisors of the young king, led by the influential regent, William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke, the effects of John's reign would be long and severe. Successful implementation of the failed Magna Carta may have ensured his son's short-term survival, yet living up to such promises created arguably a more significant challenge.
This is the story of how the varying actions of two very different kings both threatened and created the English way of life, and ultimately put England on the path to its Lost Civil War.
Yet within five years of his accession, King John's grip on the family holdings was loosening. Betrayal against his father and brother, the murder of his nephew, and breaking promises made to his supporters were just some of the accusations levelled against him. When Philip II conquered Normandy, the chroniclers believed that an ancient prophecy was fulfilled: that in this year the sword would be separated from the sceptre. For the first time since 1066, England's rule over the ancestral land was over.
For John, troubles on the continent were just the beginning of a series of challenges that would ultimately define his reign. Difficult relations with the papacy and clergy, coupled with rising dissent among his barons ensured conflict would not be limited to the continent. When John died in 1216, more than half of the country was in the hands of the dauphin of France. Never had the future of the Plantagenet dynasty looked more uncertain.
As the following pages will show, throughout the first eighteen years of the reign of Henry III, the future direction of England as a political state, the identity of the ruling family and the fate of Henry II's lost empire were still matters that could have gone either way. For the advisors of the young king, led by the influential regent, William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke, the effects of John's reign would be long and severe. Successful implementation of the failed Magna Carta may have ensured his son's short-term survival, yet living up to such promises created arguably a more significant challenge.
This is the story of how the varying actions of two very different kings both threatened and created the English way of life, and ultimately put England on the path to its Lost Civil War.
1 pages, Audio CD
Published December 10, 2024
39 people are currently reading
44 people want to read
About the author
John Paul Davis
31 books69 followers📚 John Paul Davis is the international bestselling author of fourteen thriller novels. His debut, The Templar Agenda, cracked the UK Top 20 and claimed the #1 spot in Historical Thrillers. Since then, he has continued to keep readers on the edge of their seats, with hits like The Cortés Trilogy, which reached the UK Top 40 and US Top 20, and the White Hart series, starring a secret black ops group with origins dating back to the Middle Ages.
🖊 In addition to thrillers, JPD has authored seven works of nonfiction. His debut work, Robin Hood: The Unknown Templar, sparked international press interest, while Pity For The Guy, the first full-length biography of Guy Fawkes, was featured on ITV’s The Alan Titchmarsh Show.
🏠 JPD is an active member of International Thriller Writers (ITW) and an Associate Fellow of the Royal Historical Society. He holds a BSc from Loughborough University and resides in Warwickshire, where he enjoys sports, history, reading, contemplating the meaning of life, planning book-related travels and pondering plot twists.
Checkout his official Website: www.johnpauldavis.com
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
July 25, 2025
As I am only passingly familiar with the early events of Henry III's reign, I found this book quite enlightening for unfolding the history and putting it into perspective. That perspective is greatly developed by the study of events from the beginning of the 12th century until the climactic Marshal War. A good and worthwhile read.
December 15, 2021
Interesting look at the formation of what was to later become the British Empire, taking the reader through the closing years of John's life and the early years of Henry's life, starting with his ascending to the throne as "The Boy King" and his reliance upon others for many years since he was believed to be too young to rule by himself.
Can be complicated if you don't pay attention as to who's who - you might find a scorecard would come in handy to keep track of all the participants (not necessarily a cast of thousands, but it certainly seems like it!).
Must reading for those interested in the Plantagenets and their important role in making England what it later became.
Can be complicated if you don't pay attention as to who's who - you might find a scorecard would come in handy to keep track of all the participants (not necessarily a cast of thousands, but it certainly seems like it!).
Must reading for those interested in the Plantagenets and their important role in making England what it later became.
June 17, 2023
2.5 stars
DNFed by page 108
Enjoyable & interesting for the first 80 pages, and then it suddenly got really boring as the writing style became very dry.
I still have another book by the same author about the Tower of London, which I'm very excited to read.
DNFed by page 108
Enjoyable & interesting for the first 80 pages, and then it suddenly got really boring as the writing style became very dry.
I still have another book by the same author about the Tower of London, which I'm very excited to read.
May 14, 2024
Spotlight
Shines a bright light on what to me was more obscure period of English/Anglo-French/British history. Henry was extremely lucky to have the backing of the Marshall family - but on fatal occassions, failed to realise it.
Shines a bright light on what to me was more obscure period of English/Anglo-French/British history. Henry was extremely lucky to have the backing of the Marshall family - but on fatal occassions, failed to realise it.
August 20, 2025
As the title states, the subject of this book is a forgotten or ‘lost’ civil war in England. This is not the conflict between King John and his barons, known as the First Barons’ War, but a brief war between Henry III and Richard Marshal, Earl of Pembroke. Generally treated as a footnote in the history of 13th century England, Davis argues convincingly that it was the culmination of decades of growing tension between the crown and baronage.
After a brief history of the Plantagenet dynasty, and their rise to power in England, Davis begins with the reign of John Lackland. Generally perceived as one of the worst kings ever to sit on the English throne, Davis has no truck with revisionist arguments in John’s favour. He accuses John of inheriting the worst traits of his father, Henry II - lust, cruelty, treachery - without any of the qualities that made Henry a great king. Inherently selfish, John’s habit of kicking an enemy when he was down, extorting money from his subjects, and flouting all accepted standards of behaviour, proved his undoing. Davis allows John some respite on the Continent, where the Angevin territories were already coming under serious strain before the death of his famous elder brother, Richard the Lionheart. Even so, John’s lack of mercy for prisoners, and his early losses in Normandy and Anjou, caused the so-called Angevin Empire to fall like “the proverbial stack of cards”.
This negative portrayal of John may be questionable in some respects - Davis does not mention the king’s successes in Wales and Ireland, for instance - but the long-term damage he caused is undeniable. After his death, in 1216, England was fortunate to have the capable likes of Hubert de Burgh and William Marshal to step into the breach. Along with Peter des Roches, the highly competent Bishop of Winchester, these men drove out the French and saved young Henry’s crown.
At this point, things began to unravel. The Marshal died, and de Burgh and des Roches (whom Davis refers to as the ‘Butterfly Bishop’ after an alleged meeting with King Arthur, who placed a butterfly in the bishop’s hand) fell out with each other. Davis argues that de Burgh was an Englishman to the core, and perhaps the greatest administrator that Europe has ever seen. To judge from this evidence, it is difficult to see why de Burgh deserves such an accolade; while he was ambitious and intelligent, his regency ended in catastrophe, and he lacked the skill or foresight to outmanoeuvre his enemies, des Roches in particular. Military disasters in Wales and Brittany, which were at least particularly de Burgh’s fault, only hastened his fall from power. At least he survived, unlike many later royal favourites, but even that was an act of grace on Henry’s part.
The “Lost War” itself, or Marshal War, only lasted a few months from 1233-1234. It was triggered by Henry’s feud with Richard Marshal, son and heir of the great William, who opposed des Roches and the imprisonment of de Burgh. In autumn 1233 Marshal went a step further and allied with Llywelyn Fawr (the Great), prince of North Wales, who had previously been his enemy. This was a formidable pairing, and at first proved irresistible. Their combined armies tore through the Welsh March, inflicting several embarrassing defeats on royal forces (once, under Henry’s very nose at Grosmont) and sacking Shrewsbury.
As Davis points out, the conflict might easily have blown up into a full-scale civil war. One of Marshal’s lieutenants, the darling and pugnacious Richard Siward, pillaged royal estates in Leicestershire and Winchester, as well as lands belonging to des Roches. Davis also cites Roger of Wendover’s grim account of the state of Gloucestershire, reduced to a blackened, stinking waste by the roving armies. Quote:
“It was a wretched sight for travellers in that region to see on the highways innumerable dead bodies lying naked and unburied, to be devoured by birds of prey, and so polluting the air that they infected men with mortal sickness…” If I have one criticism of this book, it is that Davis somewhat underplays Henry’s role in Marshal’s downfall. Unable to defeat the coalition of Marshal and Llywelyn head-on, the king appears to have hit upon the strategy of breaking them up. This is made clear by Henry’s orders, via des Roches, ordering the justiciar of Ireland to pillage Marshal’s estates in Ireland. To defend his lands, Marshal was forced to leave the March and hurry across the Irish Sea. There he was attacked at the so-called ‘Battle of Kildare’, in reality a grubby skirmish in which Marshal’s enemies appear to have captured him by violating a truce. He died under mysterious circumstances a few days later, despite making a good recovery from his wounds. Either foul play was involved, or his health suddenly broke down. Whatever his shortcomings as a field commander, Henry deserves more credit that Davis allows for dividing his opponents, and ultimately neutralising them.
Minor gripes aside, this is a lively and thorough account of the troubled state of England in the early to mid-13th century. Davis makes a convincing case for the importance of the Marshal War, not least in the lessons Henry learned from it, which led to the twenty-four years of peaceful rule that followed. However, the calls for widespread reform in England had only been cowed, not silenced, and they would resurface in the more famous insurrection of Simon de Montfort.
After a brief history of the Plantagenet dynasty, and their rise to power in England, Davis begins with the reign of John Lackland. Generally perceived as one of the worst kings ever to sit on the English throne, Davis has no truck with revisionist arguments in John’s favour. He accuses John of inheriting the worst traits of his father, Henry II - lust, cruelty, treachery - without any of the qualities that made Henry a great king. Inherently selfish, John’s habit of kicking an enemy when he was down, extorting money from his subjects, and flouting all accepted standards of behaviour, proved his undoing. Davis allows John some respite on the Continent, where the Angevin territories were already coming under serious strain before the death of his famous elder brother, Richard the Lionheart. Even so, John’s lack of mercy for prisoners, and his early losses in Normandy and Anjou, caused the so-called Angevin Empire to fall like “the proverbial stack of cards”.
This negative portrayal of John may be questionable in some respects - Davis does not mention the king’s successes in Wales and Ireland, for instance - but the long-term damage he caused is undeniable. After his death, in 1216, England was fortunate to have the capable likes of Hubert de Burgh and William Marshal to step into the breach. Along with Peter des Roches, the highly competent Bishop of Winchester, these men drove out the French and saved young Henry’s crown.
At this point, things began to unravel. The Marshal died, and de Burgh and des Roches (whom Davis refers to as the ‘Butterfly Bishop’ after an alleged meeting with King Arthur, who placed a butterfly in the bishop’s hand) fell out with each other. Davis argues that de Burgh was an Englishman to the core, and perhaps the greatest administrator that Europe has ever seen. To judge from this evidence, it is difficult to see why de Burgh deserves such an accolade; while he was ambitious and intelligent, his regency ended in catastrophe, and he lacked the skill or foresight to outmanoeuvre his enemies, des Roches in particular. Military disasters in Wales and Brittany, which were at least particularly de Burgh’s fault, only hastened his fall from power. At least he survived, unlike many later royal favourites, but even that was an act of grace on Henry’s part.
The “Lost War” itself, or Marshal War, only lasted a few months from 1233-1234. It was triggered by Henry’s feud with Richard Marshal, son and heir of the great William, who opposed des Roches and the imprisonment of de Burgh. In autumn 1233 Marshal went a step further and allied with Llywelyn Fawr (the Great), prince of North Wales, who had previously been his enemy. This was a formidable pairing, and at first proved irresistible. Their combined armies tore through the Welsh March, inflicting several embarrassing defeats on royal forces (once, under Henry’s very nose at Grosmont) and sacking Shrewsbury.
As Davis points out, the conflict might easily have blown up into a full-scale civil war. One of Marshal’s lieutenants, the darling and pugnacious Richard Siward, pillaged royal estates in Leicestershire and Winchester, as well as lands belonging to des Roches. Davis also cites Roger of Wendover’s grim account of the state of Gloucestershire, reduced to a blackened, stinking waste by the roving armies. Quote:
“It was a wretched sight for travellers in that region to see on the highways innumerable dead bodies lying naked and unburied, to be devoured by birds of prey, and so polluting the air that they infected men with mortal sickness…” If I have one criticism of this book, it is that Davis somewhat underplays Henry’s role in Marshal’s downfall. Unable to defeat the coalition of Marshal and Llywelyn head-on, the king appears to have hit upon the strategy of breaking them up. This is made clear by Henry’s orders, via des Roches, ordering the justiciar of Ireland to pillage Marshal’s estates in Ireland. To defend his lands, Marshal was forced to leave the March and hurry across the Irish Sea. There he was attacked at the so-called ‘Battle of Kildare’, in reality a grubby skirmish in which Marshal’s enemies appear to have captured him by violating a truce. He died under mysterious circumstances a few days later, despite making a good recovery from his wounds. Either foul play was involved, or his health suddenly broke down. Whatever his shortcomings as a field commander, Henry deserves more credit that Davis allows for dividing his opponents, and ultimately neutralising them.
Minor gripes aside, this is a lively and thorough account of the troubled state of England in the early to mid-13th century. Davis makes a convincing case for the importance of the Marshal War, not least in the lessons Henry learned from it, which led to the twenty-four years of peaceful rule that followed. However, the calls for widespread reform in England had only been cowed, not silenced, and they would resurface in the more famous insurrection of Simon de Montfort.
January 25, 2025
John Paul Davis' book King John Henry III and England´s Lost Civil War (published 2021) which I finished during Christmas 2024 still leaves an unanswered question, can a civil war be lost? I do not seem to have found a proper answer.
We all know about the first and the third civil war (1215-1217 and 1264-1265, respectively). However, the author has found a place and description of the unknown second civil war, the Marshal War that took place between 1233 and 1234.
What ignited it was (again) the barons´ opposition to Henry III´s use of foreign counsellors and administrators (: the Poitevins) and not least Peter des Roches´s animosity to the previous justiciar Hubert de Burgh.
In my opinion the Marshal War was not quite lost as England, from 1234 until 1258, experienced a certain degree of tranquility and prosperity.
Mr. Davis´ use of multiple sources is balanced and well used but at times I find the language as well as the contents of the book both hectic and confusing.
2025.01.25
pol, DK-3700 Rønne
We all know about the first and the third civil war (1215-1217 and 1264-1265, respectively). However, the author has found a place and description of the unknown second civil war, the Marshal War that took place between 1233 and 1234.
What ignited it was (again) the barons´ opposition to Henry III´s use of foreign counsellors and administrators (: the Poitevins) and not least Peter des Roches´s animosity to the previous justiciar Hubert de Burgh.
In my opinion the Marshal War was not quite lost as England, from 1234 until 1258, experienced a certain degree of tranquility and prosperity.
Mr. Davis´ use of multiple sources is balanced and well used but at times I find the language as well as the contents of the book both hectic and confusing.
2025.01.25
pol, DK-3700 Rønne
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews