The Demon's Brood

by Desmond Seward

A vivid and colorful history of the most dominant royal dynasty in English history, from Richard the Lionheart and Edward the Black Prince to Henry IV and Richard III The Plantagenets reigned over England longer than any other family--from Henry II to Richard III . Four kings were murdered, two came close to deposition, and another was killed in a battle by rebels. Shakespeare wrote plays about six of them, further entrenching them in the national myth. Based on major contemporary sources and recent research, acclaimed historian Desmond Seward provides the first readable overview of the whole extraordinary dynasty, in one volume.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Medieval, Biography, British Literature, Medieval History, Audiobook

369 pages, Kindle Edition

First published March 20, 2014

About the author

Desmond Seward was an Anglo-Irish popular historian and the author of over two dozen books. He was educated at Ampleforth and St, Catherine's College, Cambridge. He was a specialist in England and France in the Middle Ages and the author of some thirty books, including biographies of Eleanor of Aquitane, Henry V, Richard III, Marie Antoinette and Metternich.

Reviews

[Kathryn]

"Based on major contemporary sources and recent research" says the blurb. Seward repeats the 'red-hot poker' myth of Edward II's murder in 1327 uncritically as though it is gospel truth, even though only a handful of 14th-century chronicles mention it and the majority give other causes of death, and even though modern experts on the era reject the story. On the same page as repeating this stupid old myth, Seward claims that the Dominican friar Thomas Dunheved, who tried to rescue Edward from Berkeley Castle in 1327, "in 1326 had been to Rome seeking an annulment of the king's marriage." In a mere thirteen words, he makes three errors: the year is wrong (should be 1325); he fails to spot that in the 1320s the pope was in Avignon, not Rome, and had been since 1305; and he, again, uncritically repeats the story that Edward II was trying to annul his marriage to Isabella without bothering to check the primary sources (Edward was doing no such thing, and in fact sent Dunheved to the pope to complain about the archbishop of Dublin, as John XXII's own letters to Edward prove). Seward is remarkably judgemental, which I always hate to see: Edward II "had been an unmitigated disaster, without a single redeeming feature." Oh really? Not one single redeeming feature? Being the first person ever, and one of only two people in history, to found colleges at both Oxford and Cambridge universities, to take one example of many, isn't a positive? I really can't stand history books that are so black and white, that reduce complex human beings and complex events and relationships to such childishly simplistic 'analysis'.

"Based on major contemporary sources and recent research" my foot.

[Sud666 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Desmond Seward seems to have a mixture of awe and fear sprinkled with some dislike for the Plantagenet family. The fact that his easily read history of the family is named "Demon's Brood" should tell you something. His survey of the history of the family is not only easy to read, but quite enjoyable. This is no scholarly magnum opus, coming in at 300 pages and covering thirteen Kings it is a very good survey of the Plantagenets and should any strike your interest, then you can go find detailed histories of their reign.

The story starts with The First Plantagenets in 987 Anjou. Fulk III (The Black Count) and his son Geoffrey the Hammer become the Counts of Anjou by destroying their rivals. Geoffery the V in 1129 (called "plantagenet" due to the broom-flower badge) marries the widow of the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry V, Matilda (also the daughter of Henry I King of England and Duke of Normandy). Her conflict with Stephen of Blois for the throne of England will be called "The Anarchy". The compromise between the two places her son, Henry II on the throne and he is the first Plantagenet. It ends with Richard III.

Each King has his own little section that explains the man and his key historical events. The Kings are as follows (with the title Seward assigns them):

The Eagle- Henry II
The Lionheart- Richard I
The Madman- John I
The Aesthete- Henry III
The Hammer- Edward I
The Changeling- Edward II
The Paladin- Edward III
The Absolutist- Richard II
The Usurper- Henry IV
The "Gleaming King"- Henry V
The Holy Fool- Henry VI
The Self-Made King- Edward IV
The Suicide- Richard III

While not an in-depth history, this is well written and has interesting tidbits thrown in. An excellent survey of the family and a book that ought to inspire a desire to learn more detailed history about any of these fascinating Kings of England. The family itself is one of my favorites throughout history. If you feel the same, enjoy this great book that introduces us to the Plantagenet family.

[Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

I completed up through Henry III and had to stop as I reached Edward I. I was just too tired of trying to figure out which count/king/duke/baron/brother/cousin/nephew/etc., is who and why they fought for/against/switched/switched again/ran away/stood and fought/betrayed/swore allegiance, etc., in this very confusing era. Good writing but it is like trying to follow the "begats" in Genesis Chapter 5.

After a short excursion, I returned to the Plantagenets and pushed through to the end. I still can’t tell you who supported or opposed the king at any particular time. I will have to reread this at some point or find another account of this dynasty. Some great reading with plenty of confusion as France comes in and out of the stories. I did get a better sense of the Hundred Years War but the Wars of the Roses still eludes. I did not find it engrossing reading but you have to start somewhere and this one isn’t bad. 3 Stars

[Jack · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! Talk about a great overview of the entire Plantagenet dynasty. Just what I needed. I now understand so much more about the Wars of the Roses and the Hundred Years War. Great read.

[Lois · Rating 1 out of 5]

I read this in January 2022.
I was not sure if I would review this or not.
It's kinda trash and seems a waste to review but what the fuck🤷🏾‍♀️
I'm not saying don't read this. It's entertaining in places and while I enjoy the more gossipy aspects which are interesting rumors but generally not believed by historians to be fact, mostly myth & propaganda.
The example on my mind is Edward II and the hot poker in the bum. I feel like this story is just homophobic and modern historians don't believe it to be true. Even if the author believes something this controversial and biased, its not okay to really pass this off as commonly accepted truth.
There's more but why bother with later inconsistencies when this very one is called out in at least 1 other review.
Anyway, I had fun with this but the facts aren't really facts. I'd advise someone else for this period.
Dan Jones? Peter Ackroyd? Both come immediately to mind as good on facts even if I don't agree with or like their conclusions.

[Carolyn Di Leo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved this. I've read plenty of books on some of the kings we all know, Henry II, Richard I, John I, but I knew next to nothing on the others. This book gave me a bit more curiosity and now I will be looking for some biographies and histories by this author!
Each section is short and sweet and covers the main concerns of each time period and each king. I highly recommend it!

[Jacob Stelling · Rating 3 out of 5]

An easy-to-read summary of the Plantagenet monarchs from Henry II through Richard III, on the whole this book was an enjoyable and interesting read.

Two points in its favour, mainly its foundations in the ‘early Plantagenets’ beginning in 999, which shows how the dynasty was shaped by its ancestors. Secondly, the book is laid out in a way which allows various thematic aspects of each reign to be examined, and certain parts such as ‘the man’ - which allowed a window into the personality of each king - and ‘in retrospect’ - which gave a short holistic summary of each king - make this book stand out in a crowded field.

However, on a couple of occasions I did spot blunders and historical inaccuracies, as well as the author‘s tendency to present rumour and propaganda as fact without portraying any alternative theories.

This means that, while being a strong summary, this book for me cannot be considered more than ‘good’.

[Sarah - All The Book Blog Names Are Taken · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love books like this because sometimes it’s like sitting and talking with a friend about your favorite and least favorite kings and queens. While this is an overview and not an in-depth study, I still enjoyed it. I am familiar with their stories because I’ve read them a million times before but even so this was an good way to spend an afternoon.

[Laurel Bradshaw · Rating 4 out of 5]

We begin with a whirlwind tour of 300 years of English history and more than a dozen kings – all of Plantagenet history condensed into 322 pages. Desmond Seward relies mainly on period accounts and chronicles, some of whom were very biased. Nevertheless, this is a very readable and entertaining overview of the period, but do take some of his assertions with a large grain of salt. The focus is on the kings and their successes and failures with very little of any depth. Wives are almost completely ignored, including Eleanor of Aquitaine who is arguably one of the strongest women in history. But if you like his breezy style, Desmond Seward is a very prolific author with other titles including The Hundred Years War, The Wars of the Roses, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and Richard III.

I started this in 2016 for a book talk at MLA (Minnesota Library Association conference), and finally got around to reading the last 100 pages!

Description: The Plantagenets reigned over England longer than any other family—from Henry II, to Richard III. Four kings were murdered, two came close to deposition, and another was killed in a battle by rebels. Shakespeare wrote plays about six of them, further entrenching them in the national myth. Based on major contemporary sources and recent research, acclaimed historian Desmond Seward provides the first readable overview of the whole extraordinary dynasty, in one volume.

[Carole P. Roman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Insightful and interesting book about the Plantagenet family. Desmond Seward writes a comprehensive history of the volatile clan who ruled England for hundreds of years. Well researched, this is history at its finest, coloring in the outlines of larger than life personalities but giving them realistic depth. He thoroughly describes each king, his wife, and children, delving into relationships, debunking myths with thoughtful and documented facts. He describes each leader with unvarnished honesty, and manages to leave the reader with an understanding of each of the quirks of their personalities. This is not a one dimensional cardboard representation, but well fleshed out recounting of each individual. In a few decisive paragraphs, he is able to give a definitive idea of each king, whether he is a madman or a quiet family man. A pleasure to read, with descriptive prose, he manages to paint a vibrant depiction of the medieval world, describing coronations, political climates, alliances and lastly a true picture of the life and times of thirteen different kings from one dynasty that shaped a country.

[Victoria · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good overview of the Plantagenet kings - which given the popularity of the Tudors do seem to have been overlooked somewhat. Most people seem to know the odd King - i.e. Henry V and Richard III but know little about the others.

I already knew a fair bit on Henry II as my dissertation covered his introduction of the Common Law into England and being a history buff did know a fair bit about a number of the other kings. Those I didn't know much about however such as - Henry IV, Henry V, Henry III it was interesting to read about.

A good over view of the dynasty and a good starting point for those wanting to learn more. I recommend this book.

[Juliew. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a narrative of every Plantagent king in England's history.Each chapter discusses one king,his politics,religion,associates,personality,physical characteristics,women and children.I really enjoyed reading this and I thought each chapter provided just enough detail to capture the imagination but as a long time English history fan I must admit I felt slightly cheated.However,it is a highly readable and enjoyable account and I would recommend it perhaps to someone needing an overview of the dynasty.

[Kyrie · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was mildly interesting in the beginning, but quickly turned into a slog through history. I like history. The title was good. There's lots of charts and a timeline. Yet, I still was confused. Why does the British Royal family use the same names for everyone for generations? Why do historians alternate between names and titles? I find myself having to flip back to determine who was Gloucester and who was Clarence instead of moving on with the story. Unfortunately, I wound up being frustrated instead of educated.

[Nicholas Najjar · Rating 4 out of 5]

My aforementioned friend (see previous review) and I read this one together. I picked it off the shelf for her because she was interested in this period and I really like the author (again, see other reviews).

King Henry III was my favorite monarch in this book. As far as Kings go, he was actually a pretty decent human being. I would like to read more about him. The chapters covering King John and King Edward I were also really good. I enjoyed discussing these figures with her because we both have different perspectives and thoughts on each. She finds herself gravitating towards the man they immortalized as Lionheart.

The book was readable but a bit dense at times which is to be expected when reading such a complex history. Lots of different names and relations which can easily confuse the reader. Seward always uses primary source material and makes the text feel alive which helps. He is also quite critical of the Plantagenet dynasty (hence the title of the book) and does not fall into the trap of glorifying every ruler simply because they are historically regarded as “great English kings” instead he takes a far more balanced approach to analyzing their reign and individual character. For kings, like Richard II, who have been condemned as failures, he argues that they were not as ineffective and terrible as people think they are. That was also interesting.

Very enjoyable for me.

[Bosworth Field]

More than I have said, loving countrymen,
The leisure and enforcement of the time
Forbids to dwell upon. Yet remember this:
God, and our good cause, fight upon our side.
The prayers of holy saints and wronged souls,
Like high-reared bulwarks, stand before our faces.
Richard except, those whom we fight against
Had rather have us win than him they follow.
For what is he they follow? Truly, gentlemen,
A bloody tyrant and a homicide;
One raised in blood, and one in blood established;
One that made means to come by what he hath,
And slaughtered those that were the means to help.
A base foul stone, made precious by the foil
Of England’s chair, where he is falsely set;
One that hath ever been God’s enemy.
Then if you fight against God’s enemy,
God will, in justice, ward you as his soldiers.
If you do sweat to put a tyrant down,
You sleep in peace, the tyrant being slain.
If you do fight against your country’s foes,
Your country’s fat shall pay your pains the hire.
If you do fight in safeguard of your wives,
Your wives shall welcome home the conquerors.
If you do free your children from the sword,
Your children’s children quits it in your age.
Then, in the name of God and all these rights,
Advance your standards; draw your willing swords.
For me, the ransom of my bold attempt
Shall be this cold corpse on the Earth’s cold face,
But if I thrive, the gain of my attempt
The least of you shall share his part thereof.
Sound drums and trumpets boldly and cheerfully.
God, and Saint George, Richmond, and victory!

- Henry, Earl of Richmond

Richard III, William Shakespeare (1592)

[Sarah W. · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is serviceable as a summary of the Plantagenet dynasty, but for those with some familiarity with medieval British history, it can be a frustrating read. I started to dislike the author's approach early on in this book when he commented on the Empress Matilda: "sufficiently tamed to produce children." (Um, sorry, but that's stepping over the line.) Shortly after, in the discussion of Henry II, Eleanor of Aquitaine is barely mentioned, and a couple of times this notable woman is left completely out of the narrative when she really should have been there. (In the conclusion, the author bemoaned that people now only think of Henry II as Eleanor of Aquitaine's husband.) In another instance, the author accepts an account of Edward II's death that a number of historians question. While I can understand some inaccuracies in a history that covers 300+ years and allow for different perspectives on history, this book make me question whether the author really put the time into truly understanding the medieval era and the subjects of this book.

[Christina Gimlin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Great research and chronology here, but it badly needed more copyediting. English, French, Russian (and other) histories are always challenging to follow, largely because so many people share the same names—as well as individuals going by too many different names—but much was confusing in this book that didn't need to be. It also assumes (perhaps not unfairly) a solid knowledge of "basic" medieval European history. All that said, the academics behind this book are solid and until the second-to-last chapter, the narrative was followable in a way that many complex histories don't achieve.

[Wessel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Het leest aardig snel weg. Ik zit niet helemaal in de Engelse hoog-middeleeuwse geschiedenis maar het was herkenbaar genoeg om het te begrijpen. Helaas heeft het soms wel iets neer weg van een sensatiebelust boek in plaats van een echt objectieve geschiedschrijving

3 sterren

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not only was this a thrilling story, but the historiography included in it was super awesome. I listened to the audiobook, but now I need to read it physically and read every source he mentions.

[GS Good · Rating 3 out of 5]

Loved learning the history of this dynasty. I did not realize the many lasting impacts from these rulers. The biggest challenge was keeping track of the individuals as the author would switch between surnames and titles in the narrative.

[S.J.A. Turney · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every now and then you come across a non-fiction title that really stands out and is as much fun to read as a good novel. Such is Desmond Seward’s history of the Plantagenet dynasty. In fact, I found it so interesting that I kept highlighting little sections,

It came as something of a surprise to me to see the range of dates and kings covered by the book. I had always thought of the Plantagenets as being the sort of Henry II through to Edward I or II sort of era. Surprised me to see that the story begins in the 10th century and only comes to a close in the Tudor era with the last lost scions of the family.

The book takes a specific format, beginning with the origins of the Plantagenets and then taking us through the dynasty one king at a time, and then finishing with an examination of the fading of the family from the limelight after Bosworth Field.

For each king, we are treated to a brief precis, then a chronological acocunt of their life and reign, focusing on each important aspect separately, with an examination of their personality, the historiography, and then finally a summation at the end. This is a nice, neat way to deal with them and worked very well for me, with a sort of smattering of tit-bits that clung to the memory.

Another thing that struck me with the book is just how much I learned, even about the kings I thought I knew quite well. And, indeed, how interesting some of the kings I really knew little about (Henry IV for eg) compared with those I did (Richard I). So as I went through, I selected one little fact about each king that I hadn’t known by was fascinating.

Here’s a sample of what I learned:

Stephen & Matilda – if Matilda hadn’t come out on top, we’d probably have had a king Eustace!
Henry II – was given Ireland by the Pope. Who knew?
Richard I – offered coastal cities & his sister to Saladin’s brother if he would convert to Christianity…
John I – was unusually clean, with an impressive bathing routine
Henry III – was thoroughly happily married!
Edward I – rebuilt the sinking port of Winchelsea.
Edward II – he really did die in the gruesome manner we heard as kids. I’d always thought it exaggeration!
Edward III – at the battle of Berwick killed over 4000 Scots, but lost a knight, a squire & 12 foot soldiers…
Richard II – his clerk of the King’s Works was one Geoffrey Chaucer!
Henry IV – fought in the Baltic crusades with the Teutonic knights. Fascinating.
Henry V – first king since the Norman conquest to use English for his written business.
Henry VI – was a very prudish fellow who abhored nudity.
Edward IV – despite fighting some of the worst actions of his age, he never lost a battle!
Richard III – was a very capable sea captain and curtlailed the menace of Scottish piracy.

See what I mean? Fascinating little facts, and there are thousands more waiting for you in the book.

The book was released by Constable yesterday, and I recommend it thoroughly, whether you have an interest in the Plantagenets or not. It’s always good to learn more about our history, and this is to some extent the forging of the nation we know.

If I haven’t managed to hook your interest with these titbits then I never will. Go buy the book and have a read. You’ll be fascinated.

[Carolina Casas · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Plantagenet Brood continues to fascinate us and no less because of the recent explosion of costume dramas and revisionist historians. However Seward still believes in many of the old Victorian and stereotypes pertaining to this dynasty and adheres himself to the view that those who were famous were so because they were successful, never mind their circumstances that allowed their success, and those who weren't were because they were unfit or to simply put it, mad.
Surprisingly he disagrees with only two of these popular held views: Henry V and his son, the last Lancastrian monarch, Henry VI. In his book he dispels myths about the popular English hero (which I was happy for the most part since Shakespeare and English history propelled him to the level of sainthood where the man could do no wrong, Seward shows that he was far from perfect and he committed too many atrocities that call into question his so called status of a 'hero') classifying him instead as a murderer, zealot, power-hungry, amoral being. While his son, had the bad fortune of inheriting his father and uncle's problems and could not cope with the enormous pressure of ruling both England and France. While these views highlight his great understanding of the era and dispel the common held myths that one was a hero who could do no wrong and the other a 'mad king'; he goes to the other extreme casting Henry V as the worst kind of human being there could have existed while forgiving other kings (Edward I -who interestingly enough, Seward did not comment that he had as many people persecuted and ordered a mass expulsion of the Jews in 1290; Edward IV; John I who although Seward points out his flaws, he doesn't put examples of his persecution towards the Jews and other 'heretics' nor of those that followed). This double standard is very troubling, as is his use of sources. He relies heavily on Victorian historians and views of his subjects to explain why they were good or evil, and secondary sources which he sometimes puts above primary sources (like when it comes to Edward IV and Richard III whom he says deserves all the bad reputation he got from the Tudors). I do not disagree with using secondary sources but when you are writing about a book that you claim uses contemporary evidence, you can't place secondary sources above your primary ones. Also you have to take into account that every source has a bias to it and you have to explain to your readers why the author(s) chose to write that way about said king or queen. It's not a bad book but it isn't great either. Entertaining and accessible but it gives nothing new to this dynasty and the author's refusal to use primary sources over secondary is very troubling, as is leaving many important details and factors out that contributed to these kings' failures and successes.

[Stephanie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was interesting. There were some factual inaccuracies that looked like simple mix-ups. For example, the author described Phillip II of France as having one eye, but that was Phillip of Macedon. That sort of thing. It made me wonder if there were mistakes in the little things if there might be some in the big things too.

All in all, I would not take this book's word for it on things that might reasonably be in question--like what happened to the princes in the tower,--but it is a fun way to get an overall flavor for the personality and reign of each of the Plantagenets.

[Linda · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was very disappointed in this book. I am a fan of Henry II and Richard III (the first and last of the Plantagenets - my masters work was in 12th century literature) and I could tell the author really hadn't done his homework at least on them. He accepted discredited research and passed along rumors as if they might have been facts. Obviously, the rest of the family must have similar incorrect history. And the book is new enough to include the discovery of Richard III's remains.

If anything, his short sections in each man's chapter on "The Man" which describes physical and psychological characteristics seem to be reasonable. And his conclusion section in each gives a quick rundown on the overall reign.

I'd say if you want a short history about the family that reigned the longest in England's history (and the sources of several of Shakespeare's history plays), don't read this. You'll be lead along paths that will give you an untrue vision of history.

[Madison · Rating 2 out of 5]

Because this was a “comprehensive” history of the Plantagenets, I expected some comparisons between the various kings; I got basically none. I also was reading a blind hero-worship history, where he presented one chronicle’s story without referencing any others or what historians think of the story’s credibility. That’s damaging when people are only reading books like this, especially when it comes to the interpretation of historical women, who get so little page time in history as it is. (This dude does not like women, lemme tell ya.) In general, it was well-written, and he did present some theories (which he didn’t state were theories but whatever) that were new and Interesting. So 2/5, but even that second star is iffy to me

[Richard · Rating 1 out of 5]

Fronted with a sweet family tree(that lists Richard III twice??) , the best bit of the book is a super brief overview at the start of the book. It just lists the events that happened, and the dates in the driest way possible. It only takes up about 5 pages though. The rest of the book is that again with some words crammed between that illuminate the events, but fail to get any of the true bananas onto the page.

Amazing stories blast past in a sentence. I wish there was less crammed in, leaving room to tell the events in a way that would make them sound at least vaguely interesting.

If you don't know whats coming, you probably wont get much from this book.

[Rebecca Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Desmond Seward gives us an indepth view on the Plantagenet reign. Starting with the conflict with Stephen and Matilda, we begin the Plantagenet line with Henry II, and go through Richard III.
While Seward manages to mostly keep his bias to himself, there are a few monarchs (ahem, Richard III) that it seems to come out stronger with.
For the most part, I really enjoyed this read. It was a great book, and for someone who is wanting to learn more about the many monarchs and struggles that make up the Plantagenet line, this is a perfect starting point.

[Megan M · Rating 1 out of 5]

Bad bad bad. I will not be completing this book after finding serious inaccuracies and Victorian fanfiction being passed along as pure fact in just the first 40 pages. Very unhappy to see that this was published and with such a great title and cover.

[Jehmie Barrick · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you want a quick overview of the rulers this will do the trick. However, take every sentence with a grain of salt as there are MANY historical discrepancies.

[Colleen R · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a good overview of the Plantagenet Dynasty but hardly one that I would call authoritative beyond the ability to show chronological data. Seward used chronology to help the reader/listener keep track of all of the Henrys, Edwards, and Richards which helps to cement who each king was, what each did, and how they were perceived by their contemporaries. Of which very few resources were actually used. Thus much of his evidence for each King is unfortunately taken from rumor and nothing really groundbreaking or new. Just a regurgitation of dates and what may have happened.

What stood out for me was that his overview of Edward IV was far more rushed and centered more on superficial traits (i.e. he was very good looking but got fat because he was a glutton who overindulged in pleasure) than for the previous kings. Granted, I think there is a very good chance that Edward IV did contract with Eleanor Butler, given the imprisonment of Bishop Stillington, the imprisonment of George, and Edward IV's various mistresses. However I am not sure I believe that George was drown in a bucket of wine by someone other than himself. King Henry VI most assuredly was murdered, likely on Edward IV's orders, so I will give Seward that. Battles fought by Edward IV were glossed over and almost seemed insignificant compared to those of other kings. Finally hardly a mention was given about his close relationship with his brother Edmund except to say that Edmund and his father were killed during Wakefield and Edward took up Richard of York's claim as Henry VI's heir.

Another point that stood out was that Seward's chapter on Richard III was completely biased as if not even researched beyond Thomas More and Shakespeare's plays. Shakespeare while brilliant was able to take a bit of fact and turn it into an engaging work of fiction. More wrote some 30 years later and used questionable sources who changed their views based on who was in power (i.e. Rous). I do think Richard III was a violent Duke and later a violent King, however using someone's disability (i.e. scoliosis) to show evidence of a twisted personality and that Shakespeare was right is hardly credible in today's world. Richard III did nothing new, including the disappearance or murder of other claimants some who may be children, from other Medieval kings before or after him. If in fact he is responsible at all. Arthur of Brittany's disappearance centuries before Richard III comes to mind.

Seward really should have refrained from belittling the Richard III Society. Evidence, such as the fact that they zeroed in on Richard III's grave location prior to contacting the University of Leicester, shows they used research methodology to weed out poor and misinterpreted information before the actual dig. For example John Speed's story about Richard having been flung in the river was completely false and created because Speed had searched in the wrong place for him. The society also presented a female line from Richard's aunt that DNA experts could follow that turned out to be accurate. They convinced university archaeologists that those in the society were serious researchers and not a bunch of romantics.

If one wants a great chronology of the Plantagenet Dynasty this one is fantastic, but the author simply loses authority with his final two or three chapters due to what appears almost spiteful towards anyone with a different perspective of Richard III. Was this possibly because the Richard III Society has been critical of Seward?

[Andrew Canfield · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Demon's Brood is a solid starting point for readers looking to learn more about medieval English royalty. Historian Desmond Seward crafted his book to walk readers through the monarchs who reigned during the Plantagenet dynasty's years on the throne, and in this narrow sense his work achieves its aims.

The Demon's Brood functions as a quick guide to British history from the 1150s until the late 1400s. The title of the book is taken from a quotation attributed to Richard I to the effect that a diabolical streak ran in his family.

Beginning with Henry II's accession to power in 1154, Seward grants readers rapid biographical sketches and hits the high (and low points) of Plantagenet power until Richard III's death at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. The writing is really dry at points and does not try to, or even claim to, go in-depth on each ruler.

The Plantagenets are credited with conquering Wales and Ireland, and skirmishes as well as battles with areas along England's borders are constant themes in the Demon's Brood. Expect to hear a ton about attempts to subdue Scottish troops and to bring the Irish to heel. Through the auspices of King John in the thirteenth century, the family also brought Magna Carta and some semblance of power sharing with a parliament to the country.

Each of these important inflection points are covered well by Seward in the Demon's Brood.

Edward III and the Hundred Years War, in addition to the Wars of the Roses as the Yorks and Lancaster fight for supremacy within the Plantagenet clan, also comprise substantial chunks of the storyline. The details from these two separate conflicts are recorded with care, although a flair which could have been attained by a writer with better prose made it seem more like a classroom recitation of facts.

This not an awful work of nonfiction. It is apparent the author researched the Plantagenet family well and only intended to provide morsel-sized observations of each of its monarchs. The good thing about this strategy is that readers can gain a feel for each king or member of the royal retinue and do their own further reading on the ones which caught their interest.

It would be best to recommend this nonfiction work to readers using it as a jumping off point for research on England's royal family from the twelfth through fifteenth centuries. From baronial rebellions to clashes both far from and close to home, Desmond Seward does a serviceable job informing readers of what they need to know to have a working knowledge of his this era in Britain's past.

-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado