What do you think?
Rate this book
Civil War: The Wars of the Three Kingdoms 1638 - 1660
One late summer's day in 1642 two rival armies faced each other across the rolling Warwickshire countryside at Edgehill. There, Royalists faithful to King Charles I engaged in a battle with the supporters of the Parliament. Ahead lay even more desperate battles like Marston Moor and Naseby. The fighting was also to rage through Scotland and Ireland, notably at the siege of Drogheda and the decisive battle of Dunbar. The tumultuous Civil War was a pivotal one in British history. From his shrewd analyses of the multifarious characters who played their parts in the wars to his brilliantly concise descriptions of battles, Trevor Royle has produced a vivid and dramatic narrative of those turbulent years. His book also reveals how the new ideas and dispensations that followed from the wars - Cromwell's Protectorate, the Restoration of Charles II and the 'Glorious Revolution' of 1689 - made it possible for England, Ireland and Scotland to progress towards their own more distant future as democratic societies.
888 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2004
35 people are currently reading
582 people want to read
About the author
Trevor Royle
68 books34 followersTrevor Royle is a broadcaster and author specialising in the history of war and empire. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and was a member of the Scottish Government’s Advisory Panel for Commemorating the First World War.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews
January 31, 2018
Whenever I read about the English civil war I always have an irrational hope that this time Charles will win. And whenever I walk past the Houses of Parliament I’m irritated by the statue of Oliver Cromwell, standing there as though he was some kind of steadfast patron of civilised life and freedom of choice. This is a man who once said that hanging Irish soldiers was “a righteous judgement of God upon these barbarous wretches”. Cromwell always believed he had a personal hotline to God. One way of evaluating him would be to imagine his army let loose in Italy. Basically we’d have lost many of the art treasures we cherish. Michelangelo’s Pieta for one would have been smashed to bits with hammers. If there has to be a statue outside the Houses of Parliament perhaps it should be of John Lilburne, a more sincere advocate of universal suffrage and a man Cromwell cynically exploited and then imprisoned. When Cromwell was ruling Britain it was a bankrupt military dictatorship, a police state where theatre and taverns were banned and people were arrested for showing any sign of enjoying themselves on Christmas day. In other words, the common man was worse off unless he was a religious bigot. Democracy would have arrived with or without Oliver Cromwell and the beheading of Charles. But because of Cromwell’s religious bigotry the troubles in Ireland were to continue until the end of the last century.
It took me an eternity to read this very long book. No question the author does an admirable job in gathering and organising his research but what he failed to do for me was bring it alive. He lacked narrative skill. He failed to entertain or be genuinely thought-provoking. The book is overburdened with facts. Often largely irrelevant information was given the same prominence as the key moments in the conflict. Also, it was far too pro-Cromwell and the regicides for my liking. The author didn’t strike me as much of a psychologist. He offered very little in the way of insight. He’s constantly apologising for Cromwell excesses with the caveat that it’s only in our day and age that his actions might seem overly puritanical. I’m pretty sure they would have seemed puritanical at the time to everyone who didn’t believe they had been chosen by God to save the world and certainly to everyone of the Catholic faith. It’s difficult to work out if Cromwell was first and foremost a religious bigot or a vainglorious opportunist. There’s no question he was a great war general. And that he was in touch with the puritanical spirit of the times which he exploited for his own ends. What exactly those ends were remains cloudy. He wasn’t the worst of Charles’ enemies – I’d hand that award to the outrageously pompous and self-satisfied John Pym. But personal ambition seemed a far bigger motivation in Cromwell than any love for the common man. He perhaps revealed his true colours when he gave his insignificant mother a state funeral and buried her in Westminister Abbey, a very telling detail in understanding Cromwell the author excludes from his text. Just as he excludes from his text Charles’ stay in Madrid as a young impressionable man when he witnessed a king being treated as a god. The author also gave little importance to his friendship with Stafford whose execution haunted Charles and probably clouded his judgement at key moments. He was dealing with men who had killed his friend. Who of us would be able to view such men without succumbing to a stubborn hatred? The author however dismisses Stafford as an adventurer and flits over his trial and execution as if the Puritans were well within their rights to execute him as a traitor. Ultimately Charles may have been a stubborn indecisive man who made some fatal mistakes at crucial moments but he wasn’t a tyrant. The crown had been faring well in England. James was a tolerant king and we all know about Elizabeth. Even Henry VIII, wives apart, was a decent ruler. The English civil war was essentially a religious war rather than any kind of genuine demand for social change. It achieved virtually nothing positive. And, ironically, it began in Scotland.
Perhaps my loathing of the puritans dates back to my schooldays when the crushing boredom of being made to read John Bunyan and Milton almost put me off reading for life. I find nothing in this period of British history to make me proud of my nationality. I thank Charles for bringing so much splendid art into Britain. I thank Cromwell for nothing.
It took me an eternity to read this very long book. No question the author does an admirable job in gathering and organising his research but what he failed to do for me was bring it alive. He lacked narrative skill. He failed to entertain or be genuinely thought-provoking. The book is overburdened with facts. Often largely irrelevant information was given the same prominence as the key moments in the conflict. Also, it was far too pro-Cromwell and the regicides for my liking. The author didn’t strike me as much of a psychologist. He offered very little in the way of insight. He’s constantly apologising for Cromwell excesses with the caveat that it’s only in our day and age that his actions might seem overly puritanical. I’m pretty sure they would have seemed puritanical at the time to everyone who didn’t believe they had been chosen by God to save the world and certainly to everyone of the Catholic faith. It’s difficult to work out if Cromwell was first and foremost a religious bigot or a vainglorious opportunist. There’s no question he was a great war general. And that he was in touch with the puritanical spirit of the times which he exploited for his own ends. What exactly those ends were remains cloudy. He wasn’t the worst of Charles’ enemies – I’d hand that award to the outrageously pompous and self-satisfied John Pym. But personal ambition seemed a far bigger motivation in Cromwell than any love for the common man. He perhaps revealed his true colours when he gave his insignificant mother a state funeral and buried her in Westminister Abbey, a very telling detail in understanding Cromwell the author excludes from his text. Just as he excludes from his text Charles’ stay in Madrid as a young impressionable man when he witnessed a king being treated as a god. The author also gave little importance to his friendship with Stafford whose execution haunted Charles and probably clouded his judgement at key moments. He was dealing with men who had killed his friend. Who of us would be able to view such men without succumbing to a stubborn hatred? The author however dismisses Stafford as an adventurer and flits over his trial and execution as if the Puritans were well within their rights to execute him as a traitor. Ultimately Charles may have been a stubborn indecisive man who made some fatal mistakes at crucial moments but he wasn’t a tyrant. The crown had been faring well in England. James was a tolerant king and we all know about Elizabeth. Even Henry VIII, wives apart, was a decent ruler. The English civil war was essentially a religious war rather than any kind of genuine demand for social change. It achieved virtually nothing positive. And, ironically, it began in Scotland.
Perhaps my loathing of the puritans dates back to my schooldays when the crushing boredom of being made to read John Bunyan and Milton almost put me off reading for life. I find nothing in this period of British history to make me proud of my nationality. I thank Charles for bringing so much splendid art into Britain. I thank Cromwell for nothing.
June 16, 2018
What one really wants, of course, is a definitive military history of the English Revolution that starts from the premise that the Cavaliers were Wrong but Wromantic and the Levellers, Diggers and Ranters were Right but Cruelly Ronged-Against. Rather less time spent down-playing Drogheda and rather more time on the Putney Debates.
Despite the inexpicable absence of such an approach from a leading British military history, Royle gives an exciting and lucid account of the period. Even the Covenanters' disputes (kind of) make sense in Royle's hands.
Could have done with a few more pictures of Prince Rupert, though.
Despite the inexpicable absence of such an approach from a leading British military history, Royle gives an exciting and lucid account of the period. Even the Covenanters' disputes (kind of) make sense in Royle's hands.
Could have done with a few more pictures of Prince Rupert, though.
April 27, 2013
By an odd coincidence, I seem to have spent the last month or so reading two books which tackle subjects generally considered too large for one volume. Of the other The Conservatives - A History more anon, but The Wars of the Three Kingdoms shows a sensible approach to the problem in that, whilst it is hardly definitive, it is at least focused and providing of a cohesive narrative.
Royle deals with the issues which led to the war between Charles I and Parliament carefully and with an even hand, but it is the outbreak of war in which he shows his true colours - as an enthusiast for military history. The descriptions of Edgehill, Marston Moor, Naseby and Dunbar are told with a passion for action and are placed in a context of the strategic movements of armies, the internal disputes which drove their changing fortunes and the personalities who led them. It's gripping stuff.
With the military focus, other things not unnaturally lose out. The philosophical and political debates which surrounded the conflict are touched on lightly, with the Putney Debates given only minor prominence, and the personal level at which lives were torn apart by the conflict largely suborned to the greater narrative. The political difficulties of the post-war settlement are also somewhat slighted, with much less of the book going to Cromwell's various attempts at a functioning government than to his dealing with uprisings in Scotland and Ireland.
Royle's handling of Cromwell is careful. The way he writes the Restoration suggests a man not entirely unsympathetic to the Stuart cause, but he doesn't fall into the usual trap of painting the man as an ogre. Whilst he refers regularly to Cromwell's ambition - or at least to Lucy Hutchinson's view of his ambition - he also makes it clear that Cromwell was driven by the necessities of events and that he started the war believing settlement was possible, turning against the King only when it was clear Charles was fundamentally untrustworthy and only gradually turning against monarchy as a whole. It's not as detailed or nuanced a picture as something like Cromwell gives, but this is a history of the war as a whole, not Cromwell in particular. Fairfax is likewise thinly drawn, but it's interesting that Royle picks up on the reason he disappears from the picture before the King's execution.
In the end, no one volume history of the war could do the subject full justice. Royle's military account probably isn't a starting point for someone coming to the subject cold, but for someone who knows their history and wants to come at the story from a different angle it's worth reading. I will definitely be reading more by this author in future.
Royle deals with the issues which led to the war between Charles I and Parliament carefully and with an even hand, but it is the outbreak of war in which he shows his true colours - as an enthusiast for military history. The descriptions of Edgehill, Marston Moor, Naseby and Dunbar are told with a passion for action and are placed in a context of the strategic movements of armies, the internal disputes which drove their changing fortunes and the personalities who led them. It's gripping stuff.
With the military focus, other things not unnaturally lose out. The philosophical and political debates which surrounded the conflict are touched on lightly, with the Putney Debates given only minor prominence, and the personal level at which lives were torn apart by the conflict largely suborned to the greater narrative. The political difficulties of the post-war settlement are also somewhat slighted, with much less of the book going to Cromwell's various attempts at a functioning government than to his dealing with uprisings in Scotland and Ireland.
Royle's handling of Cromwell is careful. The way he writes the Restoration suggests a man not entirely unsympathetic to the Stuart cause, but he doesn't fall into the usual trap of painting the man as an ogre. Whilst he refers regularly to Cromwell's ambition - or at least to Lucy Hutchinson's view of his ambition - he also makes it clear that Cromwell was driven by the necessities of events and that he started the war believing settlement was possible, turning against the King only when it was clear Charles was fundamentally untrustworthy and only gradually turning against monarchy as a whole. It's not as detailed or nuanced a picture as something like Cromwell gives, but this is a history of the war as a whole, not Cromwell in particular. Fairfax is likewise thinly drawn, but it's interesting that Royle picks up on the reason he disappears from the picture before the King's execution.
In the end, no one volume history of the war could do the subject full justice. Royle's military account probably isn't a starting point for someone coming to the subject cold, but for someone who knows their history and wants to come at the story from a different angle it's worth reading. I will definitely be reading more by this author in future.
November 25, 2020
A very detailed overview of a tremendously important period of British History. Very full of facts, these actually sometimes detract from the narrative and it can be quite hard to read. With a bit more flourish, this would be a 5* engaging history.
January 29, 2022
This book can help an American understand the historical tension between the English, Irish, and Scottish peoples, stemming from the chaotic internecine war of the 1600s. It also extrapolates at the end how the formation of the United States is an extension of that trajectory. Cromwell: hero or villain? Still hard to say, it's complicated...
Read
August 10, 2020Picked this book out because I wanted to know, what every English schoolboy knows, more about the insurrections of the British Isles. As an American, it can all seem a bit of trivia, but as the epilogue compares Cromwell to George Washington or as The Long Process of Development by Hough and Grier states that the ghost in the room at the Constitutional Convention was Oliver Cromwell, so there is some relevance to American history and my own background.
The Long Process of Development: Building Markets and States in Pre-industrial England, Spain and their Colonies
Like all civil wars throughout history, this book got off on the wrong start. As the book was a little over eight hundred pages, it probably should have been a couple hundred pages longer, as Royle doesn’t provide much in explaining what led up to the revolts against the crown. Perhaps the editors are to blame. Instead we begin with a brief biography of Charles I in his halcyon dreams while insulated by the royal court in the 1630s and then abruptly awakened when the Scottish Covenanters were furiously organizing against the king’s aloof religious reforms. As The Great Wave by David Fischer describes larger macro-economic problems during the period and Making Money by Christine Desan describes Charles as having growing problems with financial management. Bleak economic conditions, in my mind, were most likely a key contributing factor the outbreak of the revolts. As Trevor Royle mentions the historian Samuel Rawson Gardiner as being criticized for not discussing economic dimensions for his work on the period, this book doesn’t provide too much detail either. What the book does consider in terms of provoking the war was the Scottish interest in establishing a Presbyterian system of church governance, which seems like a religious motivation, but in those days (and even today in some parts of Europe) tithes or church dues are paid, so there is again an economic dimension in church reform.
The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History
Making Money: Coin, Currency, and the Coming of Capitalism
Royle was in “hot pursuit” throughout the majority of the book of the different maneuvering of military commanders and the details of specific battles. Royle also states several times that the carnage did not reach the levels of the Thirty Years War that was happening on the continent at the same time, though there are many descriptions of the raping and pillaging, killing of prisoners and other gruesome lows that began transpired by the battle of Marston Moore, committed by both sides. Having read The Thirty Years War by Peter Scott recently, the accounts seems to have reached a similar fevered pitch. Like the Thirty Years War the difficulty in financing the soldiers and then paying arrears seemed quite similar, especially Royle’s description of the Royalist struggles in putting together their army. As situation that breed more violence and chaos and not one that wins hearts and minds of convinces the public to be complicit. Also, like the continental war, the later battles seemed to have less and less infantry and more cavalry. In terms of loss of life, according to The Square and the Tower by Niel Ferguson, the Irish lost just as much life as the Germans during these wars, close to 20% of the population.
The Thirty Years War: Europe's Tragedy
The Square and the Tower: Networks and Power, from the Freemasons to Facebook
Other aspects that I felt were under represented were the lack of information on how the Earl of Warwick’s navy was controlling supplies coming into the islands and what were the influences on the officer corps from the Dutch Republic in influencing the new government by the time of the Putney debates.
There was quite a lot about the events in Scotland and that was critical to understanding why they were changing sides and how the different revolting factions were led by different motivations.
The later sections on the Interregnum period taught me much more than I had previously known. While the problems with the old Stuart government were dismantled, the new order had to be built from scratch, with a leadership apparently unaware of much of the larger systemic problems and instead, Parliament focused on the minutiae of social regulation, like banning Christmas. Cromwell took the lead and was reliant on the major-generals to impose martial law, a much less sophisticated way of running a government. Like other revolutions, dismantling a corrupt older system is one thing, but having the know-how to replace it with a better system is entirely a different question. Progress for Britain would muddle forward from the Restoration, Glorious Revolution and onward.
The book wasn’t anything and everything about the civil wars of the British Isles but it is full of military and the political situation.
The Long Process of Development: Building Markets and States in Pre-industrial England, Spain and their Colonies
Like all civil wars throughout history, this book got off on the wrong start. As the book was a little over eight hundred pages, it probably should have been a couple hundred pages longer, as Royle doesn’t provide much in explaining what led up to the revolts against the crown. Perhaps the editors are to blame. Instead we begin with a brief biography of Charles I in his halcyon dreams while insulated by the royal court in the 1630s and then abruptly awakened when the Scottish Covenanters were furiously organizing against the king’s aloof religious reforms. As The Great Wave by David Fischer describes larger macro-economic problems during the period and Making Money by Christine Desan describes Charles as having growing problems with financial management. Bleak economic conditions, in my mind, were most likely a key contributing factor the outbreak of the revolts. As Trevor Royle mentions the historian Samuel Rawson Gardiner as being criticized for not discussing economic dimensions for his work on the period, this book doesn’t provide too much detail either. What the book does consider in terms of provoking the war was the Scottish interest in establishing a Presbyterian system of church governance, which seems like a religious motivation, but in those days (and even today in some parts of Europe) tithes or church dues are paid, so there is again an economic dimension in church reform.
The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History
Making Money: Coin, Currency, and the Coming of Capitalism
Royle was in “hot pursuit” throughout the majority of the book of the different maneuvering of military commanders and the details of specific battles. Royle also states several times that the carnage did not reach the levels of the Thirty Years War that was happening on the continent at the same time, though there are many descriptions of the raping and pillaging, killing of prisoners and other gruesome lows that began transpired by the battle of Marston Moore, committed by both sides. Having read The Thirty Years War by Peter Scott recently, the accounts seems to have reached a similar fevered pitch. Like the Thirty Years War the difficulty in financing the soldiers and then paying arrears seemed quite similar, especially Royle’s description of the Royalist struggles in putting together their army. As situation that breed more violence and chaos and not one that wins hearts and minds of convinces the public to be complicit. Also, like the continental war, the later battles seemed to have less and less infantry and more cavalry. In terms of loss of life, according to The Square and the Tower by Niel Ferguson, the Irish lost just as much life as the Germans during these wars, close to 20% of the population.
The Thirty Years War: Europe's Tragedy
The Square and the Tower: Networks and Power, from the Freemasons to Facebook
Other aspects that I felt were under represented were the lack of information on how the Earl of Warwick’s navy was controlling supplies coming into the islands and what were the influences on the officer corps from the Dutch Republic in influencing the new government by the time of the Putney debates.
There was quite a lot about the events in Scotland and that was critical to understanding why they were changing sides and how the different revolting factions were led by different motivations.
The later sections on the Interregnum period taught me much more than I had previously known. While the problems with the old Stuart government were dismantled, the new order had to be built from scratch, with a leadership apparently unaware of much of the larger systemic problems and instead, Parliament focused on the minutiae of social regulation, like banning Christmas. Cromwell took the lead and was reliant on the major-generals to impose martial law, a much less sophisticated way of running a government. Like other revolutions, dismantling a corrupt older system is one thing, but having the know-how to replace it with a better system is entirely a different question. Progress for Britain would muddle forward from the Restoration, Glorious Revolution and onward.
The book wasn’t anything and everything about the civil wars of the British Isles but it is full of military and the political situation.
May 22, 2020
Spoiler alert.King Charles 1 loses. I studied this period of English history for A level. This book is an excellent read. It strikes the balance between covering the subject in the necessary detail but always remaining accessible. I can heartily recommend it
January 16, 2024
A heavy read for those curious of British history. I might recommend to firstly grasp a little on the entire british isles geography. The amount of places referred in this book is such that the common reader will have a harsh time if basic geography of the british isles is not firstly studied.
Royle has created a beautiful book, filled with details and thought, properly organized and written in an exquisite manner. It is top-notch research material to delve and be introduced to very important historical events and characters, being Olivier Cromwell —the British "Napoleon" or "Bismark" of the period— the most developed character of them all.
The book narrates how governmental's religious imposition to their citizens can unleash a wave of nonsensical massacre and enmity between and within families across the land. A bloody war that shows how the political power can motivate a transient change through violence and death, to later return to the same spot where they started on. Pacts, betrayals, and the topic of religious freedom. The depiction of parallel elements of the period, such as the levellers vs diggers dissidence—precursors of free-speech vs collective property activists, respectively— and famous authors (e.g., John Milton), enriches the context that Taylor attempts to create. The memory of this war is filled with symbolism and heroism thanks to the later romantics of the period, where the high praise of the Cromwellian's real politik and the intellectual birth of the Commonwealth is common. However, this book tackles more than just propaganda, narrating both Cromwell's puritanical dictatorship between 1651-1660 and its fall due to overdependence on his own messianic figure. Taylor's narration encompasses the entire conflict as an Irish, Scottish and British event, instead of belittling it as merely English-centered.
Royle has created a beautiful book, filled with details and thought, properly organized and written in an exquisite manner. It is top-notch research material to delve and be introduced to very important historical events and characters, being Olivier Cromwell —the British "Napoleon" or "Bismark" of the period— the most developed character of them all.
The book narrates how governmental's religious imposition to their citizens can unleash a wave of nonsensical massacre and enmity between and within families across the land. A bloody war that shows how the political power can motivate a transient change through violence and death, to later return to the same spot where they started on. Pacts, betrayals, and the topic of religious freedom. The depiction of parallel elements of the period, such as the levellers vs diggers dissidence—precursors of free-speech vs collective property activists, respectively— and famous authors (e.g., John Milton), enriches the context that Taylor attempts to create. The memory of this war is filled with symbolism and heroism thanks to the later romantics of the period, where the high praise of the Cromwellian's real politik and the intellectual birth of the Commonwealth is common. However, this book tackles more than just propaganda, narrating both Cromwell's puritanical dictatorship between 1651-1660 and its fall due to overdependence on his own messianic figure. Taylor's narration encompasses the entire conflict as an Irish, Scottish and British event, instead of belittling it as merely English-centered.
March 11, 2024
For those of us with only the most basic understanding of the English (oh, and Scottish, Welsh and most definitely Irish) Civil War, this is a comprehensive explanation of these tumultuous events of the 17th century.
Yes, we know that Parliament fell out with the King; King Charles believed he had divine rights because he was, well, King, and the Cavaliers and Roundheads went to war and Cromwell won, cut off Charles's head (and thus named hundreds and hundreds of British Pubs) and then Cromwell died and Charles II became King.
But, I didn't have a clue about how so much of the roots of the conflict were born in Scotland because the hard Protestants Scots saw Charles reforming the Anglican Church in distinctly popish ways. I had no idea that many of the factions that opposed the King to begin with ended up fighting against Cromwell and his New Model Army; I had no idea how much came after the King's execution.
Royle, like all good historians, navigates through a vast cast of characters on all sides and keeps this complex clash of armies, politics and philosophies understandable and in good narrative sense to the less well educated (like me).
Its a fascinating era; on the surface, with the restoration, most of what Cromwell spent so many years fighting for was blown away, but in reality, the King's divine rights were never so divine again.
Yes, we know that Parliament fell out with the King; King Charles believed he had divine rights because he was, well, King, and the Cavaliers and Roundheads went to war and Cromwell won, cut off Charles's head (and thus named hundreds and hundreds of British Pubs) and then Cromwell died and Charles II became King.
But, I didn't have a clue about how so much of the roots of the conflict were born in Scotland because the hard Protestants Scots saw Charles reforming the Anglican Church in distinctly popish ways. I had no idea that many of the factions that opposed the King to begin with ended up fighting against Cromwell and his New Model Army; I had no idea how much came after the King's execution.
Royle, like all good historians, navigates through a vast cast of characters on all sides and keeps this complex clash of armies, politics and philosophies understandable and in good narrative sense to the less well educated (like me).
Its a fascinating era; on the surface, with the restoration, most of what Cromwell spent so many years fighting for was blown away, but in reality, the King's divine rights were never so divine again.
November 24, 2023
In my estimation, this is the greatest book on the English Civil War by a very very long mile. Trevor Royle covers great sections of isolated histories that all converge and coalesce into the events of the book, even those preceding them in a helpful contextual manner and delves into aspects other works fail to register and adequately explain.
Those years immediately preceding the conflict, such as the Bishops War and Charles' personal rule are seldom elaborated in proper detail for subjects of this undertaking, and often lead readers to imagine events out of a vacuum. Royle expertly counters these and lays the foundation for what is to come in a very engaging and cemented manner.
This read is very easy on the eyes, and professionally handles all the different equations and factors which would be sorely confusing for anyone interested in the period by finding a great balance between the austere scholarly diction and digestible enthusiasm
If any were to try to get a holistic look into the English Civil Wars in all angles and parties, you would do well to gather Royle in your itinerary.
Those years immediately preceding the conflict, such as the Bishops War and Charles' personal rule are seldom elaborated in proper detail for subjects of this undertaking, and often lead readers to imagine events out of a vacuum. Royle expertly counters these and lays the foundation for what is to come in a very engaging and cemented manner.
This read is very easy on the eyes, and professionally handles all the different equations and factors which would be sorely confusing for anyone interested in the period by finding a great balance between the austere scholarly diction and digestible enthusiasm
If any were to try to get a holistic look into the English Civil Wars in all angles and parties, you would do well to gather Royle in your itinerary.
June 17, 2022
Excellent narrative packed with a lot detail. It especially good on the military aspects. The period it covers is crucial to an understanding of how the British Isles & not just England emerged from the medieval into the early modern era. There is a huge cast of characters in this conflict which raged across these islands. More people died as a result of it in Ireland rather than England despite those set piece battles & those copious sieges. I came away from reading longish volume with a much better understanding of the period & why it was such crucial in Great Britain's development. A period that set the country up for the busy period that came after when Britain ruled large parts of the world during its imperial heyday.
March 11, 2024
Generally informative and intriguing take on an incredibly complex era of British history. The constant shifting of alliances and priorities could make this era confusing, but the author does a good job of making it flow well. The author is also generally fair, giving credit and criticism to the Parlimentarians and Royalists alike.
However, the book is hampered by the lack of attention given to the Irish confederacy - which is very much in the background while England and Scotland take center stage. The author is also a Cromwell defender, which comes off as quite distasteful given his attrocities in Ireland that the author tries to downplay. It left me wondering how much of what he said about Cromwell can be taken truthfully.
However, the book is hampered by the lack of attention given to the Irish confederacy - which is very much in the background while England and Scotland take center stage. The author is also a Cromwell defender, which comes off as quite distasteful given his attrocities in Ireland that the author tries to downplay. It left me wondering how much of what he said about Cromwell can be taken truthfully.
August 18, 2021
I enjoyed the writing but I would not recommend this book to someone who is not already familiar with the basics of the war. I enjoy military history but I knew virtually nothing about this conflict. I personally would have been better served with a less detailed and shorter book on the subject. There are so many people and organizations mentioned that I found it exceedingly difficult to remember many of them. While I guess coverage of the restoration and life under the Stewarts is important, the level of coverage I found to be tedious. I would have been more satisfied with just coverage of the military conflict and some basic details on politics and personalities.
June 24, 2023
At over 800 pages, this is a monster of a book but well worth a read if you truly want to understand the period.
Starting with a brief background of the Thirty Years’ War, an excellent narrative history that really brings King Charles failings, both personal and political to life, setting the scene for war. From Wentworth’s alienation of all three groups in Ireland: the “Old English” (Norman Catholics), native Irish and even Presbytarian planters; to Charles’s mistaken attempts to push episcopalianism, seen as a form of crypto-catholicism, on presbytarian Scotland, the background of the war is described in detail.
Crucially, Royle brings to life the characters that defined the era; this is a period where individual personalities have a major impact on events and explaining their motivations and idiosyncrasies is important to understand their actions.
Just as the book opens at the tail of the 30 Years' War, the epilogue narrates the opening of the American revolution. History does not happen in a vacuum and Royle does a great job at contextualising the whole period.
When war summoned the soldiers of fortune back to the country in 1638 they returned with military skills they had learned during the Thirty Years’
War honed to a fine art. (p. 7)
Constantly rebuffed, Charles tried to ingratiate himself and his letters betray a naive affection which was all the more pathetic because it was held in disdain. ‘I will give anything I have to you; both my horses, and my books, and my pieces, and my crossbows, or any thing that you would have’, he wrote in his earliest surviving letter. ‘Good brother love me and I shall love and serve you’. (p. 13)
Charles was delighted to have the friendship of such a flamboyant, energetic and good-looking man and the feelings induced were so potent that he failed to recognise the paragon’s fault’s. (p. 15)
[Charles] was also dismayed by the general rejoicing [at Buckingham’s death] and failed to understand why his personal grief had not been replicated by his subjects (p. 21)
’King James made much of the Scots while his son is close fisted with them’… …[Charles] was much offended with King James’ light and familiar way… …on the other hand the solemn gravity of the court of Spain was more suited to his own temper which was sullen even to a moroseness (p. 42-43)
Charles was reported to be ‘well pleased’ with the results and trusted they would settle the Church. He could not have been more wrong. (p. 53)
…the Bishop of Brechin was forced to read the new prayer book equipped with two loaded pistols and surrounded by retainers. As it was the precuations did the Bishop little good… …It was an unreal time bordering on hysteria (p. 58)
…officers were not slow to encourage their troops to curse and make fun of the ‘scabby, shitten, stinking, slovenly, snotty-nosed… insolent, proud, beggarly, impertinent’ Scotsmen whom they would shortly meet in battle. (p. 86)
In the third week of August Charles ended the uncertainty by riding south to Nottingham with just under 4000 armed supporters to raise his standard on a wet and miserable English summer’s day. (p. 166)
Some of his friends then dissuaded him from venturing himself as having no call to it, being no military officer. But he replied that he was weary of the times, and ‘foresaw much misery to his own country, and did believe he should be out of it before night’. He got his wish, being cut down in a bullet-shower while pushing his horse through a gap in the hedges on Round Hill. (p. 272)
…Bolton - known as the ‘Geneva of the North’… (p. 289)
…he told his captors that as far has he was concerned the war was over. ’You have done your work, boys, and may go play, unless you will fall out among yourselves.’ (p. 366)
The complexion of the war changed too. Whereas the fighting between 1642 and 1645 had been relatively civilised… …the fighting in 1648 was marked by a new savagery. (p. 430)
Langdale… …fell into parliamentary hands, only to escape later, unbelievably given his height and age, dressed as a milkmaid. (p. 470)
Towards the end of December an approach was made by Elizabeth Pool, a young woman variously described as a ‘virgin’ or a ‘monstrous witch’, who had experienced visions which seemed to suggest that the army was right to try the king… Later she would change her tune and her mumbo-jumbo would be directed against those who demanded the king’s death, but it is an indication of the tensions of that midwinter season that battle-hardened and devout men who fought as Naseby were prepared to heed the superstitious ramblings of an unknown woman. (p. 486)
For all his ruthlessness Cromwell was miserly with his men’s lives. (p. 598)
…under the Blasphemy Act a sailor was jailed for six months for gross blasphemy after writing a private letter to his girl friend saying that he would rather be in bed with her than in heaven with Jesus Christ. (p. 626)
…neither was he [Cromwell] particularly extravagant, managing to combine a reasonably lavish public lifestyle of living with austerity in his private life. (p. 671)
…soldiers were on hand to shut down alehouses or arrest known fornicators and profaners. All this went against the grain of ordinary English life. (p. 703)
…Booth escaped south, disguised as a woman. He got as far as Newport Pagnell, where an innkeeper became suspicious of ‘Mistress Dorothy’s' big frame and request for a razor. (p. 748)
Starting with a brief background of the Thirty Years’ War, an excellent narrative history that really brings King Charles failings, both personal and political to life, setting the scene for war. From Wentworth’s alienation of all three groups in Ireland: the “Old English” (Norman Catholics), native Irish and even Presbytarian planters; to Charles’s mistaken attempts to push episcopalianism, seen as a form of crypto-catholicism, on presbytarian Scotland, the background of the war is described in detail.
Crucially, Royle brings to life the characters that defined the era; this is a period where individual personalities have a major impact on events and explaining their motivations and idiosyncrasies is important to understand their actions.
Just as the book opens at the tail of the 30 Years' War, the epilogue narrates the opening of the American revolution. History does not happen in a vacuum and Royle does a great job at contextualising the whole period.
When war summoned the soldiers of fortune back to the country in 1638 they returned with military skills they had learned during the Thirty Years’
War honed to a fine art. (p. 7)
Constantly rebuffed, Charles tried to ingratiate himself and his letters betray a naive affection which was all the more pathetic because it was held in disdain. ‘I will give anything I have to you; both my horses, and my books, and my pieces, and my crossbows, or any thing that you would have’, he wrote in his earliest surviving letter. ‘Good brother love me and I shall love and serve you’. (p. 13)
Charles was delighted to have the friendship of such a flamboyant, energetic and good-looking man and the feelings induced were so potent that he failed to recognise the paragon’s fault’s. (p. 15)
[Charles] was also dismayed by the general rejoicing [at Buckingham’s death] and failed to understand why his personal grief had not been replicated by his subjects (p. 21)
’King James made much of the Scots while his son is close fisted with them’… …[Charles] was much offended with King James’ light and familiar way… …on the other hand the solemn gravity of the court of Spain was more suited to his own temper which was sullen even to a moroseness (p. 42-43)
Charles was reported to be ‘well pleased’ with the results and trusted they would settle the Church. He could not have been more wrong. (p. 53)
…the Bishop of Brechin was forced to read the new prayer book equipped with two loaded pistols and surrounded by retainers. As it was the precuations did the Bishop little good… …It was an unreal time bordering on hysteria (p. 58)
…officers were not slow to encourage their troops to curse and make fun of the ‘scabby, shitten, stinking, slovenly, snotty-nosed… insolent, proud, beggarly, impertinent’ Scotsmen whom they would shortly meet in battle. (p. 86)
In the third week of August Charles ended the uncertainty by riding south to Nottingham with just under 4000 armed supporters to raise his standard on a wet and miserable English summer’s day. (p. 166)
Some of his friends then dissuaded him from venturing himself as having no call to it, being no military officer. But he replied that he was weary of the times, and ‘foresaw much misery to his own country, and did believe he should be out of it before night’. He got his wish, being cut down in a bullet-shower while pushing his horse through a gap in the hedges on Round Hill. (p. 272)
…Bolton - known as the ‘Geneva of the North’… (p. 289)
…he told his captors that as far has he was concerned the war was over. ’You have done your work, boys, and may go play, unless you will fall out among yourselves.’ (p. 366)
The complexion of the war changed too. Whereas the fighting between 1642 and 1645 had been relatively civilised… …the fighting in 1648 was marked by a new savagery. (p. 430)
Langdale… …fell into parliamentary hands, only to escape later, unbelievably given his height and age, dressed as a milkmaid. (p. 470)
Towards the end of December an approach was made by Elizabeth Pool, a young woman variously described as a ‘virgin’ or a ‘monstrous witch’, who had experienced visions which seemed to suggest that the army was right to try the king… Later she would change her tune and her mumbo-jumbo would be directed against those who demanded the king’s death, but it is an indication of the tensions of that midwinter season that battle-hardened and devout men who fought as Naseby were prepared to heed the superstitious ramblings of an unknown woman. (p. 486)
For all his ruthlessness Cromwell was miserly with his men’s lives. (p. 598)
…under the Blasphemy Act a sailor was jailed for six months for gross blasphemy after writing a private letter to his girl friend saying that he would rather be in bed with her than in heaven with Jesus Christ. (p. 626)
…neither was he [Cromwell] particularly extravagant, managing to combine a reasonably lavish public lifestyle of living with austerity in his private life. (p. 671)
…soldiers were on hand to shut down alehouses or arrest known fornicators and profaners. All this went against the grain of ordinary English life. (p. 703)
…Booth escaped south, disguised as a woman. He got as far as Newport Pagnell, where an innkeeper became suspicious of ‘Mistress Dorothy’s' big frame and request for a razor. (p. 748)
February 17, 2025
Historical
The British Civil War, 1638 - 1660 by Trevor Royle. (9/10).
We have here 823 pages of nonstop, knuckle whitening, historical action! Chockerblock with stirring descriptions of parliamentary debates, private letters, contemporaneous commentaries and other big words, it’s a seat-of-your-pants 17th century masterclass. “Ye bastards shall n’er win my kingdom”, proclaims Charles I, whilst in reply, Oliver Cromwell is said to decry, “F*^k off beardy”. Riveting stuff for all you history buffs and anyone currently taking mind-altering drugs.
The British Civil War, 1638 - 1660 by Trevor Royle. (9/10).
We have here 823 pages of nonstop, knuckle whitening, historical action! Chockerblock with stirring descriptions of parliamentary debates, private letters, contemporaneous commentaries and other big words, it’s a seat-of-your-pants 17th century masterclass. “Ye bastards shall n’er win my kingdom”, proclaims Charles I, whilst in reply, Oliver Cromwell is said to decry, “F*^k off beardy”. Riveting stuff for all you history buffs and anyone currently taking mind-altering drugs.
July 21, 2024
pretty comprehensive, and its frequent use of primary sources by witnesses (such as quoting letters and diaries) helps to make the events vivid and more human. a solid resource for learning about the topic.
the major shortcoming with this is its lack of a dramatis personae or a glossary. there’s a bewildering number of characters and laws, and it’s very difficult to keep track of everything. if it had another version with those things included, this would be a solid five stars.
the major shortcoming with this is its lack of a dramatis personae or a glossary. there’s a bewildering number of characters and laws, and it’s very difficult to keep track of everything. if it had another version with those things included, this would be a solid five stars.
May 3, 2018
A really good history that never forgets that it was a civil war that tarted in Scotland and ended in Ireland, and that those kingdoms featured just as much as England in the events that would ensure as the government collapsed.
Also was the first case of 'Moderate Rebels' in history, with Cromwell and the Coventanters and all that foolishness.
Also was the first case of 'Moderate Rebels' in history, with Cromwell and the Coventanters and all that foolishness.
September 5, 2021
Read this on holiday recently and it gave me a new perspective on the ‘English’ Civil War, properly getting an exploration of it as a Britain-wide event. It was really interesting to see several places I know locally to me name checked in the book, and the level of research and details was fantastic.
July 17, 2019
This book provides a comprehensive and detailed chronicle of the events of the Civil Wars. Recommended for anyone interested in the subject. Guaranteed to baffle Americans when they discover that slavery was not involved.
August 3, 2025
wow, just wow. this is the first book i read about the British Civil wars and where my love of this history began, i read this cover to cover and have since bought many many books on this subject. if you want to read about the civil wars, begin with this, its thorough and very informative.
November 3, 2023
Over long but brilliant - actually makes some sense of the difficult religious aspects of the conflicts.
June 26, 2024
Very Good.
November 7, 2024
An enthralling and informative read for anyone wishing to learn about one of Britain's most important, under appreciated and unknown periods of history
January 26, 2026
Comments soon.
February 21, 2015
An excellent introduction for the layman.
As Royle correctly surmises, this terrible conflict that engulfed the British Isles, was, for years, purely presented as an English affair, with the events in Ireland and Scotland being paid lip service. By drawing all the strands together, Royle highlights how trouble in Ireland, and the refusal of the Scots to back down to religious changes being imposed upon them, presented formidable changes to King Charles, and presented his opponents in Parliament (notably John Pym) the ammunition to attack the monarchy. That the Scots were formidable troops (compared to the neglected English forces) and that they invaded England at their leisure, was probably the turning point in King Charles's reign. With the 'conclusion' of the Scottish problems, we see the gradual sliding of England into civil war, and the consequences it brought with it: Charles' execution, Cromwell, the protectorate, and the restoration.
Although Royle is no professional historian, he writes with a fluency and narrative that makes this accessible and entertaining. Yes, this book is not the be all and end of the subject, which to be honest, has thousands of books devoted to it, but as a primer, it's first class.
For those wanting more focus on the social and cultural aspects of the war, the bibliography provides a wealth of references.
Overall, an entertaining and informative read.
As Royle correctly surmises, this terrible conflict that engulfed the British Isles, was, for years, purely presented as an English affair, with the events in Ireland and Scotland being paid lip service. By drawing all the strands together, Royle highlights how trouble in Ireland, and the refusal of the Scots to back down to religious changes being imposed upon them, presented formidable changes to King Charles, and presented his opponents in Parliament (notably John Pym) the ammunition to attack the monarchy. That the Scots were formidable troops (compared to the neglected English forces) and that they invaded England at their leisure, was probably the turning point in King Charles's reign. With the 'conclusion' of the Scottish problems, we see the gradual sliding of England into civil war, and the consequences it brought with it: Charles' execution, Cromwell, the protectorate, and the restoration.
Although Royle is no professional historian, he writes with a fluency and narrative that makes this accessible and entertaining. Yes, this book is not the be all and end of the subject, which to be honest, has thousands of books devoted to it, but as a primer, it's first class.
For those wanting more focus on the social and cultural aspects of the war, the bibliography provides a wealth of references.
Overall, an entertaining and informative read.
December 7, 2015
This is a tremendous achievement to pack so much into one book. Written very much in a linear style of appreciation of history - and it is precisely because of that style that it is easier to follow the way the Civil Wars developed - it represents an excellent starter before getting into more detail of the whys and wherefores. It is easy to forget that the Wars carried on into Scotland, where so much of the early action took place and which had a major part to play, and into Ireland where the consequences had so great an affect right through to the 20th century. It gives the context to 'To Hell or Connaught' and to the horrors of Drogheda.
Sure, Trevor Royle isn't Christopher Hill, and even though Royle brings in the American War of Independence in as an epilogue it could be easy to miss the essential connection between the two. Many of the historians influenced by Hill have made this very strong connection as well as emphasising the role of the 'Motley Crew' - those banished or transported by the outcome of the Civil War, either Royalist or the establishment of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate or those Republicans and Sectaries that found the prospect of remaining in the British Isles on the Restoration beyond their ability.
Sure, Trevor Royle isn't Christopher Hill, and even though Royle brings in the American War of Independence in as an epilogue it could be easy to miss the essential connection between the two. Many of the historians influenced by Hill have made this very strong connection as well as emphasising the role of the 'Motley Crew' - those banished or transported by the outcome of the Civil War, either Royalist or the establishment of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate or those Republicans and Sectaries that found the prospect of remaining in the British Isles on the Restoration beyond their ability.
Read
December 19, 2011I was bought this book some time ago by my then husband after I told him of a growing interest in Charles II and his links to Jersey, and he miss-remembered what I had said.
It has taken me a bit of time to get through the book, and at times I have had to grit my teeth and keep ploughing on by willpower alone, but on the whole I have enjoyed the book. The civil wars were massive, involving so many people all over the country. And there were so many battles, it is quite exhausting. We live in a much simpler time I think – the Parliamentarians were at war with the Scots, the Irish and the Dutch at different times, as well as Royalists.
Sadly Charles II isn’t in the book much, and when he is mentioned, it’s not always in a complimentary way, and his time in Jersey, the thing I was most interested in, is not covered.
I will not remember much of the detail in this book, but I have come away with a better awareness of the civil war, and even, perhaps, a grudging respect for Cromwell.
It has taken me a bit of time to get through the book, and at times I have had to grit my teeth and keep ploughing on by willpower alone, but on the whole I have enjoyed the book. The civil wars were massive, involving so many people all over the country. And there were so many battles, it is quite exhausting. We live in a much simpler time I think – the Parliamentarians were at war with the Scots, the Irish and the Dutch at different times, as well as Royalists.
Sadly Charles II isn’t in the book much, and when he is mentioned, it’s not always in a complimentary way, and his time in Jersey, the thing I was most interested in, is not covered.
I will not remember much of the detail in this book, but I have come away with a better awareness of the civil war, and even, perhaps, a grudging respect for Cromwell.
April 14, 2021
Excellent tome of in-depth description of momentous events. It starts with a dense, sometimes difficult, explanation of the complex religious and political affairs that Charles I instigated and became entangled within, before turning to the march and prosecution of the wars. The personalities are well described and the battle sequences even more so. The undeniable shock and importance of Charles's execution is especially vivid and poignant. The subsequent Commonwealth and why it collapsed after Cromwell's death provided insights that I hadn't known before.
August 7, 2011
Firstly, Royle writes fluently and makes this complex set of stories much more readable. Then I appreciate the sub-title especially - the wars of the three kingdoms - as it was a terrible period of history in Scotland and Ireland as well as in England and Wales. Finally, what a magnificent piece of research, covering the entire civil war, so typical of Royle.
September 15, 2015
I would recommend this book to anyone wishing to discover and/or understand the events, causes and effects of this tumultuous period in English history. Eloquently written it made me feel as if I was actually there looking on as history was made.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews