The English Civil War: A People's History

by Diane Purkiss, illustrated (Illustrator)

In this compelling history of the violent struggle between the monarchy and Parliament that tore apart seventeenth-century England, a rising star among British historians sheds new light on the people who fought and died through those tumultuous years. Like the Magna Carta and the American Revolution, the English Civil War resolved fundamental questions of sovereignty and political rights that are still the guiding principles of democracies today. However, the price of peace included the execution of a king, brutal persecution of Catholics and Royalists, and years of tyranny. Drawing on exciting new sources, including letters, memoirs, ballads, plays, illustrations, and even cookbooks, Diane Purkiss creates a rich and nuanced portrait of this turbulent era. Purkiss peoples her story with fascinating characters, from the obstinate King Charles I to his opponents such as the poet John Milton, from the brutal and egomaniacal Oliver Cromwell to the self-styled prophet Lady Eleanor Davies, to witchfinders, revolutionaries, and ordinary men and women. The English Civil War’s dramatic consequences—rejecting divine right monarchy in favor of parliamentary rule—continue to influence our lives. In this colorful narrative, Diane Purkiss vividly brings to life the history that changed the course of Western government.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, English Civil War, 17th Century, War, British Literature, European History

1000 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Purkiss also writes children's books with her son, Michael Dowling, under the pseudonym Tobias Druitt.

Reviews

[Rindis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Purkiss' history of the ECW was something of a slog for me to get through. The general idea as given is admirable: to look at the English Civil War as something that involved people, and see how various people were impacted by it.

In general, the technique for this is good. She's gone through a lot of primary sources, and found ones with fairly consistent records for an extended period of time, and used them to generate narratives at the personal level, with lots of extensive quotes. There's a lot of contextualization around this, and it pays off.

However, outside of that, the results aren't nearly as good. I suspected that Middlekauff's The Glorious Cause rested too much on 'everybody knows' facts about the American Revolution, and I'm sure that Purkiss has done this here. She's English and writing for an English audience, so I can't say how on-target she is on her assumptions, but I found her brushing by statements as if they were self-evident, and they were not for me. The trained bands of the early fighting are mentioned but not described. I know generally what they are because I've read Haythornwaite's book on the ECW, which goes into them. Here, they're a blank spot.

And that's a symptom of the larger issues of the book. It's roughly chronological in format, but has extended breaks to talk about particular social issues at length, which breaks up the chronology enough to make it difficult to keep track off. Some of the major battles get very good treatment, using descriptions from participants to at least show how the action felt for some of the non-commanders (actually quite valuable). Certain areas get similarly good treatment, as one of her sources has a bunch of letters showing what was happening around a manor in hostile country. But there's not a lot of consistency or solid presentation here.

At best, this is a good second or third book to read about the ECW. Find a good regular general history first, then turn to this to start filling in some of what was going on away from the most dramatic parts.

[Bluenose · Rating 4 out of 5]

Contrary to the title, this is not a history of the English civil war of the 1640’s. It’s a collection of contemporary accounts from original documents focusing on a number of people who were prominent and obscure participants in the historical events. The research was staggering and is documented in FURTHER READING at the end of the book.

Reading the actual words of the participants is a revelation and immediately conveys the sensibilities and motivations of the time. To say religion was the cause of the civil war is an over simplification but it is evident that many of those involved were strongly influenced by their religious beliefs to an extent that is difficult to grasp today. Christian fundamentalism was the back bone of all the factions from the Catholics to the various Protestant sects.

Charles 1 was the big loser but, oddly, the monarchy eventually won out in the Restoration. How did this happen after the profound upheaval of the civil war? That question is not addressed here. The author spends some time describing the democratic movements (including the Levellers and the Diggers) which were swirling about and concludes that they were not nearly as influential as subsequent left wing intellectuals made them out to be.

[Cristina · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very interesting account of the background, events and main actors in the English Civil War. I've read it mainly because I have a very deep interest (okay, an addiction...) for Maria McCann's As Meat Loves Salt and I wanted to know more about the historical setting of her novel.

This book certainly gave me food for thought and clarified some aspects of the New Model Army, the Diggers' colonies, the religious factions etc. All things I didn't know much about and that are central to McCann's novel if one wants to really understand Jacob and Ferris' ideals, objectives and shortcomings.

[John Damon Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Personal, tragic, and compelling, this tome is exactly what I could have wanted as an introduction to this period in Britain.
Told in a way largely reliant on the voices and perspectives of those who lived through it, the book portrays the war in the full breadth of the society it scarred. Kings and generals have to wait their turn to exonerate themselves alongside farmers and prophetesses. Purkiss brings us into the tents of tacticians, but also has us listen in on kitchen conversations. This dedication to the scope of war is admirable, even if at times exhausting.

[Richard Pierce · Rating 4 out of 5]

A touch fragmented in places, but a fantastic read and a real eye-opener. It's also totally relevant to what is happening in England right now in 2020. Parliament was usurped by Charles I AND Cromwell. Parliament was abused both by Royalists and Parliamentarians. And, the way I see it, Johnson and Cummings right now are acting more like Cromwell and his mob than anything else. Cromwell never wanted true democracy. He wanted power for the sake of power. Another message which comes through clearly - the English have always been racists and xenophobes. The irony is that Charles I was internationalist and Parliament isolationist. This was a religious war as much as anything. I could go on. We need real proportional representation in this country as well as the abolition of the monarchy. If we don't we'll remain stuck innthe 1640s, which is what we are now.

[Cropredy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Seduced by the cover blurbs, I thought this was going to be a history of the English Civil War done in a way more accessible than the C.V. Wedgewood classic - a book I found dry and hard to follow, a book where one gets lost in obscure doctrinaire disputes between the various religious dogmas.

So, was this book better?

Well, sort of.

On the down side - the book is far too long, weaving in first hand accounts of many people, who pop up again and again in various chapters. But you've long since forgotten who they were unless the personage is already a famous name (like John Milton). Far too much time is spent on elaborate detailed histories of some of the people going back to their childhood.

The book is loosely chronological but sometimes veers off into social issues whose story is better told across a span of years.

On the plus side, you do get some vivid accounts of specific events leavened with considerable first-person accounts.

From the vantage point of the 21st Century, I had previously seen the conflict as one between the royalists and the Parliamentarians as one with no relevance today but something that just happened to pre-Enlightenment societies across Europe. I had also thought the Parliamentarians were the 'good' side as the name evokes modern representative governments.

Purkiss upended my pre-conceived notions. She presents the conflict as a fight-to-the-death between the 'godly' and the Royalists - where the godly saw the Royalists as papists who needed to be exterminated. And the godly were no nascent constitutionalists, they had more in common with ISIS than with 2017 Westminster. It was a strict religious predestination and the one true manner of faith. Towns are sacked, women and children butchered, prisoners put to the sword. The Cavaliers were equally guilty. As an American, our own Civil War can't be used to transpose American preconceptions onto the English Civil War.

As Purkiss points out, the passions of the time were inflated by numerous pamphlets that cited true, sort-of-true, and frequently false acts of barbarity committed by the other side. Hence one can not avoid imagining a similar conflict taking place in the U.S. between a militarized Christian heartland versus the multi-cultural, secular humanist coastal elites so reviled in populist media. Perhaps we haven't come so far from the 17th Century than we think.


Bottom line: Purkiss's primary aim is to tell the tale of the English Civil War through the eyes of the participants - both lowly and high. It is not a story told through the lens of great men and great battles with a strict chronological narrative, or one where each side is treated dispassionately through the distance of time.

So, while eye-opening in places, the book's length and detailed chapters causes the reader to lose track at times of the big picture and whether there was any strategy employed by the main factions and how said strategy was measuring up against objectives.

There's a shorter more coherent book on the English Civil War waiting to be written that can blend in Purkiss' impressive research into primary sources with a narrative that can keep the reader's attention. A book that can somehow explain the religious dogmatic fights in terms relatable to modern readers as such dogma was central to the initial turning out of Charles from London and the start of the conflict.

[Daniel Wright · Rating 4 out of 5]

There is possibly no period of English (indeed, British) history more unjustly neglected than the Civil Wars. Far more than the feudal wranglings of the Wars of the Roses, they made the United Kingdom the nation that it is, politically, ideologically, and even spiritually. This is the central thesis of this magnificent book, illustrated through the words and actions of innumerable individuals: high and low, male and female, all the parts they play are instrumental in the unravelling of events. Carefully interweaving the narrative with the lives of real people, ordinary and extraordinary, the author - a masterful storyteller - moves now forwards, now backwards, keeping the reader engaged through almost six hundred pages. The story does not end where she leaves off, unfortunately, but with so much content already she can hardly blamed for that. Everyone who wants to understand what the importance of Britain has been in world history over the last three hundred odd years could do much worst than start here.

[John Herbert · Rating 4 out of 5]

The English Civil War is the most underrated occurrence in British history; even the major battlefields are poorly marked and signposted. And yet this remarkable war amongst ourselves changed forever how this island of ours ruled their affairs.
Of course there are countless books running through the battles and reasons, but this book goes deeper into the psyche of the real people - the ones who fought, the ones who remained behind to be savaged by both armies, the ones who battled for a real revolution of ideas and how classes should be tolerated or removed forever. Amidst the trauma of religious divides, the choice between King or Parliament, the curse of the Witchfinder General rises up to add to the mix.
If you want a peep through the keyhole at Britian in this 17th century maelstrom, take a peep through Diane Purkiss' novel. It's a 600 pages that doesn't read easy at times but take the time anyway - it's a real eye-opener.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was an excellent alternative to a traditional top-down history of the English Civil War. I was fascinated, but I am interested in this period so I suppose it wouldn't take much to hold my attention. It was engagingly written and I enjoyed the focus the author placed on religious extremism rather than battles. My only criticism is that she expected the reader to remember the names of all of her little-known figures as easily as they remembered the names of Cromwell and Fairfax, so a dramatis personae might have been useful. Whenever a section began with 'Anna Morris did not fare so well, however' I thought who's that again? The maid or the brewery owner?

All in all though, great read, kept me busy for months.

[Ben · Rating 3 out of 5]

The research done for this book was obviously immense and there are many gems about all areas of English society during the civil war. When Purkiss writes about Milton, Cromwell, or the royal family for example, she hits her groove. Or when she gets on a more narrowly defined topic like food, Christmas, iconoclasm, or specific radical reformers, this book is riveting. However, the incredible body of research often takes precedence over the narrative of the story which causes the book to sometimes be a bit of a chore. I think that this book could have been 150-200 pages shorter and it would have improved it.

While there are assumptions that Purkiss makes that I am uncomfortable with, on the whole her regard and respect for her subject is refreshing.

[Shawn · Rating 2 out of 5]

This history is rather disorganized and sometimes difficult to follow, but it does a good job of purveying the FEEL of the Civil War by examining the wartime experiences of people of more ordinary rank than the royals and grandees and other major players, including several women. Take it for what it's worth.

[zed · Rating 2 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book but had issues. It was not as well written as I would have liked. A peoples history this is but Charles Carlton's Going To The Wars told it so much better.

[Samuel Nouvellon · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought this book as I was looking for a fresh perspective on what I consider to be a underrated and often-ignored period of history whose importance is neglected by general culture.

Diane Purkiss does a good job of highlighting some of the voices that are often glossed over in most narrative histories: the women, the poorer population, and the children. She is effective in showing that rather than simply being a faceless mass following recognisable leaders (which I don't think we truly believe anyway), these people not only had their own views but a significant amount of agency. She uses the example of a range of women (Lucy Hay, Anna Trapnell, Ann Fanshawe, and more) to illustrate their central role to the period: they were preachers, soldiers, politicians, managers, and landlords as much as wives and mothers. She also gives a strong sense of the opportunities offered by those turbulent times and the world-shattering confluence of ideas, concepts and situations that changed society - and ways of thinking - forever.

However, if you are a newcomer to the period, this isn't the book for you.
Even as someone who has a reasonable grasp of the main personalities and events, I struggled to follow what was going on. The focus is oddly skewed: major players are introduced and then promptly forgotten about without explaining their role. Most egregiously, Oliver Cromwell himself is effectively ignored for the whole book, aside from a page or so on his personal background in the first chapter. This is the man who, having been born in a family barely qualifying for the gentry, would end up the ruler of England and a central figure in the early attempts to establish a republican constitution in Western Europe. His journey from obscure, devout man of modest means to becoming the symbol of the "world turned upside down" makes his lack of presence a very bizarre choice, in my view.

Charles I on the other hand gets a lot of space to breathe, and we get a well-rounded portrait of him. Yet his importance to the broader themes of a revolution in ideas is limited: in fact, he was about the only man in England who didn't realise the world had changed.

It doesn't help that chapters are generally organised by theme, albeit in a vaguely chronological order, including a good one on cookery books from the period. While I generally enjoyed the exploration of the new ideas springing from the chaos, their treatment is a bit mismatched: we get a lot of somewhat snarky commentary on the Diggers, but almost nothing about the Independents, who were a far more important faction within society and Parliament. Their revolutionary idea that all religions should be tolerated (except Catholicism of course, although that was less clear cut than one might expect) is barely covered.
The flip side is that the narrative flow is cut up and the sense of progressive logic is lost. I am not sure the gains made by using a semi-thematic approach outweigh the loss of narrative progression.

Even if you can make sense of the general story, it is massively let down by the abrupt end upon the execution of King Charles I. Now clearly this is a major milestone that drew the civil wars to a close, but a lot of the revolutionary thinking and historical developments are yet to happen: the Instrument of Government is still to come, as is the rule of the Major Generals with the legacy of distrust of state control, and the various twists and turns endured by England as she wrestled with the alien concept of government without a king. Those events left a significant mark on society which, barely twenty years later, would be establishing the earliest forms of modern government as we recognise today.
I know this book is about the Civil Wars, but with its focus on the new types of thought, it seems odd that Purkiss chose to not cover half of what makes this period so interesting.

[Nick Garbutt · Rating 4 out of 5]

History is not just the story of the rich, famous and important people who so often dominate its telling.
It is just as much about all the rest of us who live less elevated lives. The problem is that whilst extracting stories of the “ordinary” experience of great events is straightforward enough today, given widespread literacy rates and the prevalence of social media, this was not the case in the past.
This is what makes Diane Purkiss’s account of the English Civil War so special.
It writes of Charles I and Cromwell and Ireton and Milton but also of forgotten figures like Anna Trapnell and William Goffe too. There are descriptions of the wounds inflicted by combatants, and the rudimentary treatments given for them.
Purkiss writes of the lasting trauma the conflict visited on so many, the effects of widespread hunger, the theft of crops and livestock and the boom in cookery books which proliferated at the time.
And with England about to crown a new king, it tells the story of how this conservative nation was radicalised in the 17th Century and how it came to be that a republic was established and a king executed more than 100 years before the great revolutions in France and America.
Unlike Jonathan Healey’s The Burning World, Purkiss writes quite a lot about Scotland and Ireland too where the conflict casts its shadow to this day.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you want a history of the battles of the English Civil War, this is not the book for you. If you are interested in the human side of this horrific period, then this is a book for you. While the battles are mentioned, they are placed in a much broader context.

This is a history of the English Civil War, told to a considerable extent through the words of observers and participants. Letters and diaries of people such as Brilliana Harley; tracts by Garrard Winstanley (a leading Digger); the debate at Putney, between leaders and Levellers add a very human element to this history.

The befuddled King Charles I and his strong-willed Queen, Henrietta Maria, are portrayed in enough depth that the reader can come to understand how they sealed their fates by being unable to recognize a changing reality.

The book takes into account religious disputes, political currents, and military developments.

For any reader interested in this critical moment in English history, this is a book well worth purchasing and reading.

[Mark Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the English Civil War(s)/Revolution protagonists saw each other as the other, (whether“papist/ royalist” or “puritan/parliamentarian”) - and the fighting was driven by iconoclasm, religious extremism and propaganda.

Diane Purkiss skillfully outlines the individual stories of people caught up in violence as a result, and alongside some of the better known figures, looks also at the common soldier and the villager, for example.

Reading this at the time of the Hamas /Israeli war I was struck by the parallels with Diane Purkiss’s account of 17th century England and events in the current Israel-Hamas war.

Both these “holy wars” can be seen as  genocidal as defined by the United Nations: genocide being acts ”committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.( https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevent...)

Wearing her allegiance to Christopher Hill lightly,Purkiss provides a humane guide to the effects of such apartheid ideologies on people, and the attendant misery,chaos,violence, and hunger that resulted.

[Czarny Pies · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very solid book about England during the civil war. It covers the events of the war as well as providing a solid overview of the cultural, theological and intellectual context in which in occurred. I have not read enough on the period to know how well it compares to other books written on the topic. It may even be worth an additional star.

The book manages to explain both why the monarchy fell and why it would be restored once Cromwell was dead.

[Ata · Rating 2 out of 5]

omg thank god this is over. I tried reading slowly so I could really absorb the text but this book does not make that easy or enjoyable.

I found this book to have too much and not enough information at the same time - the chapters and points which I found most interesting (such as the one regarding Henrietta Maria, or the cooking chapter) felt all too short, while other sections were so long drawn out i found it hard to navigate and absorb, or really find interest in.

The author bounces around a lot between points in time - this isn’t necessarily a bad way of writing history, but it really isn’t executed well in this book. Certain terms or movements are introduced at the very beginning, then not mentioned again until about 15 chapters later, and the author expects you to remember without fault. Even with me making notes this was really difficult - not to mention when the author makes mention of terms not even introduced to begin with. It just leads to so much confusion!

The author tries clumsily to make a very dense writing of the war eloquently, which is done really poorly (it unfortunately reminds me of my own attempts of writing in school, which I feel like is saying something)

Anyways, I was kind of just disappointed in this text. I don’t know how you can commit to putting over 600 pages of words to paper, and yet seem to have so little interest in a text. The overall experience of reading this felt like listening to a drawling lecture from a teacher who is clearly burnt out from their job - it’s not intentionally bad by any means, but just lacks any energy or life. I just felt like I was taking in raw data - which is crazy considering the aim of this book is to investigate normally untold stories from the English civil war period..

Anyways, save yourself the time and skip this one

[Dropbear123 · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75/5

I'd say the book is decent but nothing special. The causes of the war and after 1645/the battle of Naseby sections are pretty good but the middle felt like a bit of a slog. At 560 pages it is quite a long book and that is mostly due to the focus on the personal stories, personally I feel the book was too long. The book is called a people's history but I felt like the focus on various individual's stories was the weak part of the book, I preferred the wider overview sections. There's plenty of quotes and extracts from various people at the time, especially in the battle sections, if you like that (personally not a big fan, they interrupted the flow of the book). The book is good at painting a grim picture of the reality of the civil war in regards to atrocities, hunger, hatred etc - it feels almost apocalyptic at times.

Overall I'd say if you can find a cheap copy it might be worth a read. It is described as readable/accessible and I'm not sure I agree with that (this isn't a time period I've read much about so I'm coming in as a relative beginner). The focus on individual stories makes it harder to follow the bigger political and military historical story/events.

[Redsteve · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has done nothing to change my opinion that pretty much everyone involved in the English Civil War was an asshole. The events of the war are shown here though the lives and personalities of those who went through it: Royalist and Parliamentarian, English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Godly (as well as economic/religious groups such as the Levelers and Diggers), male and female, Royalty, aristocrats, and commoners, great magnates, small landholders, merchants, servants, and laborers, soldiers and poets, politicians and preachers. Purkiss shows how the attitudes, beliefs and fears of these people shaped the process of the war, the trial and execution of Charles I - and eventually the creation of the Protectorate and the Restoration. This book is better in most cases at giving the reader the contemporary FEEL for the English Civil War rather than in giving a straightforward description or detailed analysis of the events. I found the author's cynical style enjoyable. 3.5 stars.

[Emma Cate · Rating 4 out of 5]

The English Civil War: A People's History by Diane Purkiss is a veritable treasure trove of information and insight, unravelling the tapestry of one of the most pivotal moments in English history. The author's passion and understanding of the subject matter shines through on every page, painting a vivid and captivating picture of the events that shaped a nation.

As one delves into the book, they may feel as if they are entering a labyrinth of historical events and figures, but fear not! The author is a masterful guide, providing a clear and steady hand to lead the reader through the twists and turns. The first-hand accounts interwoven throughout the book bring a human touch to the history, making the events come alive and leaving the reader with a deeper understanding and appreciation of the complexities of the war.

However, it is essential to note that this book is not for the faint of heart. It is a behemoth of a tome, delving into the nitty-gritty details of the war with surgical precision. But for those who are willing to embark on the journey, the rewards are bountiful. The author takes the reader on a journey through the heart of the war, exploring the motivations and actions of all those involved, from the highest levels of leadership down to the common folk.

In conclusion, The English Civil War: A People's History by Diane Purkiss is a tour de force of historical writing, offering a rich and enlightening glimpse into one of the defining moments of English history. It is not for the casual reader, but for those who have a thirst for knowledge and a love of history, it is a journey well worth taking. I would give it a resounding 4 stars and recommend it as a shining gem in the crown of historical literature.

[Aaron B · Rating 5 out of 5]

Democracy in the Cradle, or, Birthed from the Blood of Tyranny

Originally selected for information regarding Matthew Hopkins, this book provides much more context and detail of the political climate in which witchfinding flourished in early modern England. While Hopkins is dealt with in only one chapter, the history is told in the words of participants and is insightful into the lives and struggles of all classes of the English people throughout the 1640s, encompassing the First and Second English Civil Wars.

This history is highly recommended for studying the ascendancy of Protestantism and its influence on establishment of the Rights of Man as the basis for self-governance. Many precepts of the "godly" Levellers found their way into the American Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Very interesting book for anyone who wishes to better understand the origins of modern democratic thought.

PS: Also includes excellent tales of military derring-do and political chicanery.

[Chris Leathley · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book falls somewhere in between narrative history in the traditional sense and the type of polyphonic memoir approach pioneered by writers like Svetlana Alexeivich. So, not quite as radical as some might suggest but still bracing in the way that it eschews an entirely linear approach and certainly refreshing in the number of ‘ordinary’ voices that it seeks to amplify. Purkiss writes with imagination and empathy. She draws upon a range of themes, some of which feel more relevant than others. Regardless, it is an ambitious, bold book that is probably a little tricky at times, if you don’t already have a basic understanding of events. I found it a genuine, full-throated pleasure to read.

[Sarah W. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This history is long and detailed and provides a good sense of what it would have been like to live through the English Civil War in the 1640s. Not just military history, but the religious dynamics creating turmoil, the witch hunts, the dramas of families and lovers, and politics of Charles I and Parliament are all discussed, providing an impression of a tumultuous age. I particularly enjoyed the author's explanation of how, in this time, even cookbooks were political. An excellence book for understanding this period of English history.

[Sophie · Rating 2 out of 5]

:-(

[Graham Catt · Rating 4 out of 5]

As the sub-title to this book indicates, this is no straightforward history. As a “people’s history” it concentrates on minor characters, small moments, rather than major battles. This means it is sometimes fascinating, sometimes dull. (Did we need several pages on cookbooks?!?) I found some of it quite tedious, though others may enjoy.

Would recommend reading a regular Civil War history, then complement with this volume.

[John Ferngrove · Rating 4 out of 5]

My serious interest in world history began more than thirty years with the gift of George Trevelyan's, England under the Stuarts. This book to, was a gift that has long languished on my maybe to read one-day shelves. I can't remember what made me to decide to give it a go. Perhaps I was just seeking a casual break from all the Python programming books I've been absorbing over the last few months.

Anyway this describes itself as a people's history, a social history I suppose, and the bulk of it is indeed made up from extracts of the letters and writings of a broad selection of people from the period, attempting to give as wide a representation of classes and backgrounds as possible, from royalty down to peasantry and tradespeople. Of course there is the proviso that documents only come down to us from the literate classes. But it seems that literacy at this time, with the bible in English well established, and the earliest broadsheets and pamphlets in circulation in the cities, means we can see well beyond the perceptions of just the aristocracy and gentry. The lives of women are well represented alongside those of their menfolk. The book is clearly a great labour of love backed by an immense body of research.

Probably the most striking feature of the book is the examination of the role of religion in the build-up towards the war, and the great diversity of motives and aspirations of those that fought in it. There seems to be an endless proliferation of religious doctrinal differences, conspiracy theories, rampant iconoclasm, not to mention fevered millenarian prophecies and witch hunts, all amid a general chaos of intellectual and ideological currents. These really were Britain's Taliban years, and it is almost impossible for a modern secular mind to get to serious grip with the outlooks of
the people of these times, which would seem childish if they were not so savage in their consequences. That people would fight, die and engage in the most appalling cycles of atrocity for such reasons seems almost unthinkable in our time and place.

The political and military aspects are interspersed into the thematic coverage of the social as a sort of structural scaffolding, but not particularly systematically. Lieutenant-Colonel Cromwell, hardly gets a mention in fact. Part of my deduction of a star is due to the fact that these political-military aspects are included so haphazardly that no one seriously interested in that kind of chronological treatment would be much the wiser for having read this account. We get names, fragments of speeches, the occasional movements of troops, but all out of any overarching context. To me at least, the coverage of these aspects is so fragmentary that one has to ask why they were even included. Even if just as a structural context for the social themes, I can't help feeling it could have been done a bit better than this; a coherent high level view perhaps, rather than the interjection of decontextualized fragments.

I found the book became electrifying in the last hundred pages when we come to what is evidently known as the Second Civil War (I had no idea), when the parliamentarian leaders took steps to curb the more idealistic and even revolutionary impulses of the yet to be dispersed soldiery, and the radical political movements that many embraced. I like to think I am someone who knows a bit about the darker aspects of his birth-nation's histories, but while I have heard of the Levellers and the Diggers, that is about all I could say about them. I didn't even know that they were a consequence of the Civil War and the hopes of many of the poorer classes for a fairer world at its conclusion. I also knew nothing of what was done, mainly at the behest of Cromwell and Ireton, to suppress these movements and ensure that, while an overweening King had been displaced and the fear of a return to Catholicism rooted out, the broad power structures of aristocracy and gentry would be restored at the end of hostilities. I have an intention to find out more about these movements in future.

Another reason for my shaving off a star is that, while the book is fascinating, it is both long and not a terribly easy read. So much material drawn from documents of the day, all in archaic language with a great diversity of regional vernaculars can, at times, make for a wearisome read. This is me just being lazy of course, but as a lay rather than academic reader a certain amount of hard work was demanded.

[Gramarye · Rating 2 out of 5]

A little too speculative for this historian's liking, but a decent starting point for someone interested in an introduction to the English Civil War that focuses more on people (especially women) and less on politics.

[Moravian1297 · Rating 2 out of 5]

Out of all the books on the seventeenth century English Civil Wars (or English Revolution if you read Christopher Hill, but the author here really doesn't like that terminology, as she points out in the book) that I've read recently, this Diane Purkiss effort is singularly the worst.

The main reason that I haven't really got on with them, is that they leave far too much of the writing in the flowery language of the day, copying it verbatim, there's way, way too much, thou's, art's, hath's and thee's, to name but a few. Although this book has got, 'A People's History' as a subtitle, I thought that was going to be, FOR the people, not BY the people, and even then, I hadn't bargained on the laziness of the author either. Where, instead of interpreting what seventeenth century folk had written and then putting it into her own words of contemporary parlance, she's just copied and pasted it as it was put down at the time of its writing!

Even although I've levelled this criticism at all the non fiction English Civil War books I've read so far, this one has by far been the most guilty, and the others have at least redeemed themselves somewhat, by giving me little titbits here and there, where I've still been able to take something from them. But here, apart from reinforcing my belief that, for the most part, people in the seventeenth century were utterly insane, for example, killing people for putting a few small railings around an alter? I mean c'mon?! WTF?! That’s MENTAL! And a few amusing anecdotes, there wasn't really much to write home about at all. There's also loads and loads of religious stuff, that no matter how often I read about, I'm just not getting, like 'predestination', which TBF, just sounds and comes across as utterly, utterly bonkers!

A couple of the amusing stories went like this,

'More fears were aroused by the 24th June. Mr William Littleton being at Ludlow last week, as he came out the church, a man came to him and looked him in the face and cried, "Roundhead!" He gave the fellow a good box of the ear, and stepped to one that had a cudgel and took it from him and beat him soundly. They say, they are now more quiet in Ludlow.'

'Nehemiah Wharton, for a Godly man, he seemed strikingly fond of swearing, disliking his lieutenant-colonel, and calling him, "A Goddamn blade! And doubtless hatched in Hell!" In a letter to his master, Willingham.'

I'm never done being called a 'blade' by egregious, foul mouthed drunks down the pub haha! But all said and done and joking aside, that was about it as far as anything interesting goes with this book, it didn't really add any new information, or give much in the way of interesting insights that I hadn't previously read. I’d recommend Michael Braddick’s ‘God’s Fury, England’s Fire’ and anything on the seventeenth century English Civil Wars by Christopher Hill before this one.

However, on saying that, I did find one thing particularly interesting and which was unique to this book.
After I’d read Christopher Hill’s, ‘World Turned Upside Down’, which concentrated on individual groups, within the English Revolution and their somewhat revolutionary ideas, beliefs and practices, I’d had an inspirational notion myself. Although the thinking of these groups were still mainly seen through the suffocating and bizarre prism of religion, they were still fairly close to communistic and anarchist thinking and most definitely way ahead of their time. Groups like the Levellers, Diggers, Agitators and Ranters were advocating communal living, redistribution of land, free love, republicanism and although rare, anticlericalism, where even atheism shone through in some instances.
Because of this, I had struck upon the idea of writing a concept album for my band, about these events, and using Geoffrey Chaucer’s, ‘Canterbury Tales’ as a template, for example, The Digger’s Tale, The Ranter’s Tale, The Covenanter’s Tale, The King’s/Stuart’s Tale, etc, etc. Building to an overall conclusion, and all the while finding comparisons and parables with contemporary society as the ’money shot’ to finish off, so to speak.
Now, imagine my total surprise and delight when I discovered that the author, Diane Purkiss, had done almost EXACTLY that to tell her story here, for part of this book! For example, the author here has, The Gentlewoman’s Tale among others. Talk about ’great minds think alike!’, (or ’fools seldom differ’, at least for my part anyway!Haha!) I was stunned, to say the least, amazing, truly amazing!
Unfortunately however, my delight soon turned to sadness, because since the author has done that within this book, I am now unable to write my piece, as like with ’The Dancing Priest’, Father Liam Finnegan’s young nemesis in ’Father Ted’, it’ll look like I ripped off the idea!

[Nathan Albright · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was originally called "The English Civil War:  A People's History," and that would have given me a much more clear idea of the perspective of this author and also a great deal less fondness about it given the low quality of people's history thanks to their Maoist perspectives to begin with.  To be sure, this book has some of that, but the author manages to strike that ambivalent tone where she shows herself in favor of Christmas and generally favorable to authoritarian government as a whole on the one hand while also showing a certain fondness for Levelers and Diggers and female pamphleteers and Cornish and Welsh peasants seeking a better life and clubmen looking for peace between the warring sides.  This book was written by someone who could not keep on point but who was as easily distracted as a pariah dog by the sight of a squirrel.  She has obviously done a lot of reading of primary and secondary source material, much of which is detailed in this book, but at the same time this book was not nearly as enjoyable to read as it should have been given its subject material.

This book is about 600 pages long if you include its lengthy suggestions for further reading, and is divided into 33 chapters.  The author begins with an account of the last surviving Cavalier (1) after the list of illustrations and maps and then looks at the unsettled peace that preceded the Civil War (2).  After that there is a discussion of two women (3) and the Bishop's Wars that began the conflict in Scotland (4).  The author discusses English anti-Catholicism (5), a frequent matter of discussion in this book, as well as the call to conflict (6) and the opening skirmishes (7) leading up to Edgehill (8).  This leads to a discussion of iconoclasm (9), the death of dreams (10), the war over Christmas (11), the struggles of the Queen (12), and the fight at Newbury (13).  The author looks at the two capitals of Oxford and London (14), the bitterness of war (15), two marriages, including that of noted poet John Milton (16), Marston Moor and its making of Cromwell (17), as well as problems of hunger (18) and the slaughter of the Battle of Lostwithiel (19).  There follows discussions of witchcraft (20), children's tales (21), Montrose's quixotic campaign in Scotland and Northern England (22), the new political fervor of women and lower classes (23), Naseby (24), the siege of Taunton and the neutralist Clubmen (25), as well as the escape of James II (26).  Finally, the book ends with the capture of Charles I (27), the Levellers (28), and Diggers (29), the entire Second Civil War (30), Charles I in captivity (31), the trial and execution of the king (32), and the aftermath (33) of the war after which there are suggestions for further reading and an index.

A great deal of this book is spent in either setting up the English Civil War and discussing the religious roots at the basis of it or talking about tangential matters that are of interest to the writer but may not be of interest to the reader.  The writer finds herself fascinated by divided families, by the flawed humanity of people on both sides, by the way that many people sought to resolve the tensions that the wars brought out through suicide charges, by matters of witchcraft and the way that what was thought of as up-to-date thinking was not.  She talks about the way that the war made the common people suffer greatly even as it brought misery to all classes of society.  She shows a particular interest, as might be expected, in revolutionary politics and laments that it was crushed by people like Cromwell.  The only people that the author appears to show little sympathy for are those who were sincerely biblical Protestants of a very seriously religious streak who avoided the pitfalls of leftist politics.  The fact that these people are the ones I am most sympathetic towards meant that I frequently found the author's bias lamentable at best.