What do you think?
Rate this book
Battle Royal: The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462
England, 1454. A kingdom sliding into chaos.
The mentally unstable King Henry VI, having struggled for a decade to contain the violent feuding of his dukes, is losing his mind. Disgruntled nobles support the regal claims of Richard, Duke of York, great-grandson of Edward III. The stage is set for civil war.
The first volume of an enthralling two-part history of the dynastic wars fought between the houses of Lancaster and York, Battle Royal traces the conflict from its roots in the 1440s to the early 1460s—a period marked by the rise and fall of Richard of York, the deposition of Henry VI following the Lancastrian defeat at Towton, and the subsequent seizure of his throne by Richard's son Edward.
Populating this late-medieval saga of ambition, intrigue, and bloodshed are such fascinating characters as the vacillating Henry VI himself, his indefatigable queen Marguerite of Anjou, Richard of York (father of kings but never king himself), his opportunist ally Richard Neville—"the Kingmaker"—and the precociously virile Edward of York.
Charting a clear course through the dynastic complexities of fifteenth-century power politics, and offering crisply authoritative analysis of the key battles of the Wars of the Roses, Battle Royal is a dynamic and rigorously researched account of England's longest and bloodiest civil war.
The mentally unstable King Henry VI, having struggled for a decade to contain the violent feuding of his dukes, is losing his mind. Disgruntled nobles support the regal claims of Richard, Duke of York, great-grandson of Edward III. The stage is set for civil war.
The first volume of an enthralling two-part history of the dynastic wars fought between the houses of Lancaster and York, Battle Royal traces the conflict from its roots in the 1440s to the early 1460s—a period marked by the rise and fall of Richard of York, the deposition of Henry VI following the Lancastrian defeat at Towton, and the subsequent seizure of his throne by Richard's son Edward.
Populating this late-medieval saga of ambition, intrigue, and bloodshed are such fascinating characters as the vacillating Henry VI himself, his indefatigable queen Marguerite of Anjou, Richard of York (father of kings but never king himself), his opportunist ally Richard Neville—"the Kingmaker"—and the precociously virile Edward of York.
Charting a clear course through the dynastic complexities of fifteenth-century power politics, and offering crisply authoritative analysis of the key battles of the Wars of the Roses, Battle Royal is a dynamic and rigorously researched account of England's longest and bloodiest civil war.
400 pages, Hardcover
First published December 3, 2015
17 people are currently reading
1313 people want to read
About the author
Hugh Bicheno
21 books16 followersHugh Bicheno graduated from Cambridge and later joined the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6). He is now a political risk analyst and an historian of conflict.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
May 22, 2021
I'm a bit torn about this book. On the one hand, I learned some interesting new information about the various families involved in the Wars of the Roses and the backdrop to some of the key events. On the other hand, I was frustrated by Bicheno's tendency to accept or dismiss explanations and theories with minimal discussion of their merits or flaws. For example, he accepts wholeheartedly the idea that Edward IV was illegitimate. This may be true (I have read other more convincing arguments for this), but Bicheno's discussion of the evidence is too limited to be entirely convincing, especially given that he goes on to refer to Edward's illegitimacy as accepted fact later in the book. He also makes assumptions about the relationship between Richard, Duke of York, and his wife Cecily Neville, for example in his discussion of York's flight from an enemy army at Ludlow with his eldest sons while Cecily and the younger children stayed behind to face the army. Bicheno says this "was not an action any wife or child was ever likely to forgive," even though other sources I have read suggest that this plan of action was a joint decision. At various other points in the book, Bicheno makes controversial claims or discards traditional explanations without sufficient discussion of his reasoning.
Even though I am very familiar with the history of the Wars of the Roses, I found the structure of the book somewhat hard to follow because of its shifting, non-linear chronology. An event would be discussed in relation to a particular family in one chapter, only to reappear later without explanatory detail, forcing me to flip back through the book to remind myself of what the issue was all about. Despite my previous familiarity with the topic, I found it hard to keep track of some of the minor characters who cropped up at intervals. The list of key people included at the beginning was helpful, but only to a degree and not without flaws. For example, Henry Stafford is correctly listed as the younger son of the 1st Duke of Buckingham and the second husband of Margaret Beaufort, daughter of John, but the dates of his life listed are those of his nephew, another Henry Stafford, grandson and successor of the first duke.
The frequent repetition of names during this period would complicate the life of any historian, and Bicheno doesn't always make it easy to distinguish between identically named people. One example is the name John Neville, which is borne both by a key Yorkist (brother of the Earl of Warwick and cousin of Edward IV) and by their relative, a notable battle commander on the Lancastrian side. The Yorkist John Neville is captured at the second battle of St. Albans, but when he is released, Bicheno suddenly refers to him as Montagu, without explanation. I happened to know that John Neville was created Lord Montagu, but not all readers would be aware of this fact, so for Bicheno to suddenly mention the release of Montagu, a name he has not mentioned before, is confusing. The title of Lord Montagu was bestowed on John Neville before the second battle of St. Albans, so why not mention this elevation earlier in the book and avoid unnecessary confusion?
I liked the many included maps and tables of the peerage/church leadership of the time, but the family trees were a source of frustration due to errors. Several individuals are misplaced or incorrectly described in the family trees where they appear. For example, in Appendix D, where Bicheno discusses the Beauchamp inheritance, the two Anne Beauchamps are reversed, with the aunt listed as the 15th Countess of Warwick and her short-lived niece listed as the "16th Countess of Warwick by right following the death of her namesake niece." Eleanor and Elizabeth Talbot are listed as daughters of John Talbot, 1st Viscount Lisle (son of the 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, another John Talbot), when instead they were his sisters. In the Neville family tree, Joan Neville's husband, William FitzAlan, is incorrectly named as the 1st Duke of Warwick. That title is also—correctly—listed in the same family tree for Henry Beauchamp, married to Joan's sister Cecily. William FitzAlan was actually the 16th Earl of Arundel and did not die in 1446, as listed, but rather in 1487. These errors about historical people with whom I was familiar makes me question the correctness of the information about people unfamiliar to me.
Bicheno also made a couple of references to "Game of Thrones" that I found jarring. Yes, George RR Martin based his pseudo-medieval fantasy series on the Wars of the Roses, but Bicheno is writing about actual history, which doesn't need the fictional references—however minor—to be compelling. The acknowledgements at the end of "Battle Royal" make it clear that it was "Game of Thrones" that sparked Bicheno's interest in the Wars of the Roses, so apparently he couldn't resist throwing in a couple of quick references.
Finally, the index for the book was lacking. Several noteworthy people were not listed at all, while for others, several pages on which they appeared were not listed (making it hard to go back to reread previous references). At least in one case, two people with the same name were conflated into a single listing: the index listing for Cecily Neville, Duchess of York, includes not only the pages on which she appears, but also references to her namesake niece, who married Henry Beauchamp, Earl (later Duke) of Warwick, and died young.
All of this may sound nitpicky, but taken as a whole, these issues marred my enjoyment of what would otherwise have been an interesting way of telling the history of the Wars of the Roses. I did enjoy the book, but not as much as I would have without its flaws. I'm still undecided as to whether I'll read the second volume, "Blood Royal."
Even though I am very familiar with the history of the Wars of the Roses, I found the structure of the book somewhat hard to follow because of its shifting, non-linear chronology. An event would be discussed in relation to a particular family in one chapter, only to reappear later without explanatory detail, forcing me to flip back through the book to remind myself of what the issue was all about. Despite my previous familiarity with the topic, I found it hard to keep track of some of the minor characters who cropped up at intervals. The list of key people included at the beginning was helpful, but only to a degree and not without flaws. For example, Henry Stafford is correctly listed as the younger son of the 1st Duke of Buckingham and the second husband of Margaret Beaufort, daughter of John, but the dates of his life listed are those of his nephew, another Henry Stafford, grandson and successor of the first duke.
The frequent repetition of names during this period would complicate the life of any historian, and Bicheno doesn't always make it easy to distinguish between identically named people. One example is the name John Neville, which is borne both by a key Yorkist (brother of the Earl of Warwick and cousin of Edward IV) and by their relative, a notable battle commander on the Lancastrian side. The Yorkist John Neville is captured at the second battle of St. Albans, but when he is released, Bicheno suddenly refers to him as Montagu, without explanation. I happened to know that John Neville was created Lord Montagu, but not all readers would be aware of this fact, so for Bicheno to suddenly mention the release of Montagu, a name he has not mentioned before, is confusing. The title of Lord Montagu was bestowed on John Neville before the second battle of St. Albans, so why not mention this elevation earlier in the book and avoid unnecessary confusion?
I liked the many included maps and tables of the peerage/church leadership of the time, but the family trees were a source of frustration due to errors. Several individuals are misplaced or incorrectly described in the family trees where they appear. For example, in Appendix D, where Bicheno discusses the Beauchamp inheritance, the two Anne Beauchamps are reversed, with the aunt listed as the 15th Countess of Warwick and her short-lived niece listed as the "16th Countess of Warwick by right following the death of her namesake niece." Eleanor and Elizabeth Talbot are listed as daughters of John Talbot, 1st Viscount Lisle (son of the 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, another John Talbot), when instead they were his sisters. In the Neville family tree, Joan Neville's husband, William FitzAlan, is incorrectly named as the 1st Duke of Warwick. That title is also—correctly—listed in the same family tree for Henry Beauchamp, married to Joan's sister Cecily. William FitzAlan was actually the 16th Earl of Arundel and did not die in 1446, as listed, but rather in 1487. These errors about historical people with whom I was familiar makes me question the correctness of the information about people unfamiliar to me.
Bicheno also made a couple of references to "Game of Thrones" that I found jarring. Yes, George RR Martin based his pseudo-medieval fantasy series on the Wars of the Roses, but Bicheno is writing about actual history, which doesn't need the fictional references—however minor—to be compelling. The acknowledgements at the end of "Battle Royal" make it clear that it was "Game of Thrones" that sparked Bicheno's interest in the Wars of the Roses, so apparently he couldn't resist throwing in a couple of quick references.
Finally, the index for the book was lacking. Several noteworthy people were not listed at all, while for others, several pages on which they appeared were not listed (making it hard to go back to reread previous references). At least in one case, two people with the same name were conflated into a single listing: the index listing for Cecily Neville, Duchess of York, includes not only the pages on which she appears, but also references to her namesake niece, who married Henry Beauchamp, Earl (later Duke) of Warwick, and died young.
All of this may sound nitpicky, but taken as a whole, these issues marred my enjoyment of what would otherwise have been an interesting way of telling the history of the Wars of the Roses. I did enjoy the book, but not as much as I would have without its flaws. I'm still undecided as to whether I'll read the second volume, "Blood Royal."
April 9, 2019
If you're interested in the War of the Roses, this should not be your first book on the subject. If it is, be ready to hit the ground running.
June 6, 2024
Touted as a true historical retelling of the fictional series “Game of Thrones”, Bicheno sets out to write a history of England’s 15th Century Wars of the Roses. It is a highly complex and primarily political history of England’s “peerage” or nobility from that period. While Bicheno valiantly attempts to explain the complicated intermarriage of key parties(a network of dukes, earls, viscounts, barons, and knights), it proves a difficult topic for the casual reader to fully grasp through a cursory reading. The Wars of the Roses(so named for the white and red rose insignias adopted by the opposing sides) are a tangled web of political machinations and shifting alliances. That in itself makes it intriguing, but truly requires a greater understanding of English political structure that the majority of readers would lack.
Bicheno painstakingly attempts to portray the connections through multiple genealogical tables and charts, but the result is still a muddled recounting of names and titles that is difficult to make sense of. At times, it is difficult to distinguish between who is on the Lancastrian and Yorkist sides. A highly rudimentary review would be that it largely involves a power play for the crown of England between sitting King Henry VI and his wife Marguerite(Margaret) and an opposition party largely led by Richard Plantagenet Duke of York. The story is compelling, but hard to follow. This volume details the events of the “first phase” of the Wars of the Roses 1440-1462. I do appreciate Bicheno’s efforts to explain the outbreak of this conflict as a direct result of the English defeat from the Hundred Years’ War with France, which coincided with the domestic internal squabbling within England as a fallout from that loss.
Bicheno painstakingly attempts to portray the connections through multiple genealogical tables and charts, but the result is still a muddled recounting of names and titles that is difficult to make sense of. At times, it is difficult to distinguish between who is on the Lancastrian and Yorkist sides. A highly rudimentary review would be that it largely involves a power play for the crown of England between sitting King Henry VI and his wife Marguerite(Margaret) and an opposition party largely led by Richard Plantagenet Duke of York. The story is compelling, but hard to follow. This volume details the events of the “first phase” of the Wars of the Roses 1440-1462. I do appreciate Bicheno’s efforts to explain the outbreak of this conflict as a direct result of the English defeat from the Hundred Years’ War with France, which coincided with the domestic internal squabbling within England as a fallout from that loss.
January 13, 2026
While otherwise an engaging look at the Wars of the Roses, Bicheno's confident subscription to outdated and disproven scholarship regarding the parentage of King Edward IV forces me to wonder where else he didn't do his due diligence.
January 30, 2024
an intelligent take, but quite Lancastrian in its sympathies. Tries to revise the revisionists and put up some of the villains of the time (such as Margaret of Anjou) on a pedestal. In common with most Lancastrians the author is quite to the right of the political spectrum, and does not try to hide it at all, but shouts it out from the very roof tops
April 20, 2018
I was entirely disappointed by this book. I’ll admit now that I didn’t get very far in, but that is the issue. I’ve read a lot of books like this before and generally enjoy the genre, but something about the way this is written is so dry. It just went through my brain as name salad with a hodgepodge of Edwards, Henries, Richards, and Johns. It’s almost as if the book assumes you are already familiar with many of these people and their relationships with each other. I was so unengaged that I had to shelve this one.
December 15, 2020
Having read the second part of this series [1] before the first, I had some idea of what to expect from this author. This book follows the other in the series in that it is a book about military history that seeks to provide aspects to the Wars of the Roses that other readers might not pay much attention to. In this particular case, the author has a strong degree of fondness for a few characters that have either been viewed in a negative fashion or have been neglected altogether. In the former category we have queen Marguerite of Anjou, the wife of the likely mentally ill Henry VI, who the author is intensely critical towards given his sabotage of the peaceful efforts made by his wife and the Duke of York in providing good governance. In the latter category we have the obscure churchman John Kemp, peacemaking Archbishop of Canterbury. The author notes, sadly, that the fragmentation of the realm and its power provided the impossibility of solving issues when the sovereign himself was an obstacle to peace and good government and justice when there was a divine right view of that monarch, a fatal contradiction that was only solved when kings could be separated from their heads and from authority as happened to Charles I, two hundred years after the events of this book.
This book is about 28 chapters long and just over 300 pages in length in terms of its main contents. The book begins with a lot of supporting material, including a list of maps, tables, and family trees, protagonists and marriages, maps, a family tree of the English princes of the blood, as well as a preface. This is followed by a prologue that talks about passionate princesses, along with the role of the houses of Lancaster (1), Beaufort (2), Valois-Anjou (3), and York (4) in the factions and feuds of the early Wars of the Roses (5), including the defeat and humiliation England faced in Normandie and Guyenne (6) and the struggle between Richard and Henry for power and rule (7), as well as the rise of the House of Neville (8). After this the author talks about the figure of Marguerite (9), the relationship between the pope and the crown (10), as well as the actions of Richard (11) and Henry (12) that led to a Yorkist coup d'etat (13), followed by Marguerite's counter-coup (14). After that there is a look at the Lord of Calais (15), the importance of the Welsh (16), the relationship between Marguerite and Henry (17), and the English Way of War. After this comes chapters on Marguerite's army (18), the resurgence of the Lancaster faction (19), the rise of Warwick (20), betrayal (21), the relationship of Marguerite and her son (22), Richard's death and humiliation (23), the rise of Edward of March (24), the bubble reputation of Warwick (25), two kings (26), the knight's gambit of Towton (27), the end game (28) and the checkmate that led to the establishment of the Yorkist regime (coda). After this comes four appendices which provide a look at the English peerage by date of creation and alphabetical, archbishops and bishops in England, and the Beauchamp inheritance, after which there is a list of works consulted, acknowledgements, image credits, and an index.
One of the things that this book does particularly well is to discuss the context of the Wars of the Roses in the combination of the humiliation of the English in their defeat in France as well as the failures of the rulership to provide good government, thus alienating a large portion of elites, many of whom had contrasting goals and ambitions themselves. Unfortunately, the author shows that the ambitions of many of the nobles was against good government that would have allowed for a sustainable royal budget, which hindered the support that was given to Richard of York in his attempts to be Lord Protector of England for life. Also if interest is the way that the author discusses the English Way of War and a supposed preference for decisive battle that was not shared by many continental Europeans who had a fondness for positional warfare that simply was not to be found in England's wars despite the large amount of castles that could be found. This book certainly qualifies as a war and society book in such a way that it talks about a familiar era of history but in a way that brings to light much that is confusing or unfamiliar, including the importance of personal diplomacy and the limitations of influence of women and churchmen in an age where politics became increasingly bloody and brutal.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2020...
This book is about 28 chapters long and just over 300 pages in length in terms of its main contents. The book begins with a lot of supporting material, including a list of maps, tables, and family trees, protagonists and marriages, maps, a family tree of the English princes of the blood, as well as a preface. This is followed by a prologue that talks about passionate princesses, along with the role of the houses of Lancaster (1), Beaufort (2), Valois-Anjou (3), and York (4) in the factions and feuds of the early Wars of the Roses (5), including the defeat and humiliation England faced in Normandie and Guyenne (6) and the struggle between Richard and Henry for power and rule (7), as well as the rise of the House of Neville (8). After this the author talks about the figure of Marguerite (9), the relationship between the pope and the crown (10), as well as the actions of Richard (11) and Henry (12) that led to a Yorkist coup d'etat (13), followed by Marguerite's counter-coup (14). After that there is a look at the Lord of Calais (15), the importance of the Welsh (16), the relationship between Marguerite and Henry (17), and the English Way of War. After this comes chapters on Marguerite's army (18), the resurgence of the Lancaster faction (19), the rise of Warwick (20), betrayal (21), the relationship of Marguerite and her son (22), Richard's death and humiliation (23), the rise of Edward of March (24), the bubble reputation of Warwick (25), two kings (26), the knight's gambit of Towton (27), the end game (28) and the checkmate that led to the establishment of the Yorkist regime (coda). After this comes four appendices which provide a look at the English peerage by date of creation and alphabetical, archbishops and bishops in England, and the Beauchamp inheritance, after which there is a list of works consulted, acknowledgements, image credits, and an index.
One of the things that this book does particularly well is to discuss the context of the Wars of the Roses in the combination of the humiliation of the English in their defeat in France as well as the failures of the rulership to provide good government, thus alienating a large portion of elites, many of whom had contrasting goals and ambitions themselves. Unfortunately, the author shows that the ambitions of many of the nobles was against good government that would have allowed for a sustainable royal budget, which hindered the support that was given to Richard of York in his attempts to be Lord Protector of England for life. Also if interest is the way that the author discusses the English Way of War and a supposed preference for decisive battle that was not shared by many continental Europeans who had a fondness for positional warfare that simply was not to be found in England's wars despite the large amount of castles that could be found. This book certainly qualifies as a war and society book in such a way that it talks about a familiar era of history but in a way that brings to light much that is confusing or unfamiliar, including the importance of personal diplomacy and the limitations of influence of women and churchmen in an age where politics became increasingly bloody and brutal.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2020...
April 23, 2019
In recent years, the study of the English conflict known as the “Wars of the Roses” has become rather popular. The Lancasters and the Yorks fighting for the English throne. Only one can be the winner. When we do look at this time period, we tend to focus on the people involved in the battles and the political aspect of the conflict. The battles, how they were fought, and why the conflict started in the first place tend to be pushed to the sideline. That is not the case with this particular book. In Hugh Bicheno’s book, “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462”, the political and military aspects combine with family histories for a comprehensive look into what made this time period so fascinating.
I came across this particular book by browsing the shelves at Barnes and Noble. I saw that it was about the Wars of the Roses, but I was not familiar with the author. I decided to give it a shot and I am so glad I did. This book is a delight and a fantastic resource.
Bicheno starts his book by exploring two extraordinary women whose families would shape the direction that the Wars of the Roses would take; Jacquetta Woodville and Catherine de Valois. Both women married for love and this love would shape who would win the crown of England, as Bicheno explains:
Sometimes love does conquer all: despite having turned their backs on the game of power, Catherine and Jacquetta became the common ancestors of every English monarch since 1485. Before that could happen, all those with a superior claim to the throne had first to wipe each other out. This they did in what was, in essence, a decades-long, murderously sordid dispute over an inheritance within a deeply dysfunctional extended family. It became merciless not despite but because the combatants had so much in common, and projected their own darkest intentions onto each other….it was an extraordinary period in English history. Four of the six kings crowned between 1399 and 1485 were usurpers who killed their predecessors, undermining the concept of divine right as well as the prestige of the ruling class. (Bicheno, 10-11).
Family drama is the center of Bicheno’s book so he spends several chapters laying out the major players and how they were related to one another. This can get a tad bit confusing for those who are not familiar with the story, so Bicheno has included family trees and a list of protagonists and marriages to help readers. I will say that they became very useful for me as I was reading this book and I would highly suggest you use the resources that Bicheno has included in this book for future research. Bicheno also included maps, which corresponded with the different battles that were important between 1440 and 1462, not only in England but in France, Wales, and Scotland as well.
What really impressed me about this book was the amount of detail that Bicheno was able to include and making it understandable for any casual student of the Wars of the Roses, yet engaging enough for a scholar. That is not an easy feat, but Bicheno is able to do it. He uses modern data with extensive research of historical documents, knowledge of medieval military strategies, and interpreting all of this information for modern readers, which included a few nods to a certain popular show(Game of Thrones) that is roughly based off of the events of this time period.
Hugh Bicheno breathes new life into the study of the Wars of the Roses. I wasn’t really sure what to expect when I first started reading this book, but I am extremely glad I did. Even if you think you know tons about the Wars of the Roses, this book will surprise you with new information and make you question your previous knowledge about the battles in the first part of this tumultuous time. If you have an interest in the Wars of the Roses and understanding how it occurred from a military and a political point of view, I highly suggest you read Hugh Bicheno’s book, “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462”. It is an eye-opening, riveting reading experience.
I came across this particular book by browsing the shelves at Barnes and Noble. I saw that it was about the Wars of the Roses, but I was not familiar with the author. I decided to give it a shot and I am so glad I did. This book is a delight and a fantastic resource.
Bicheno starts his book by exploring two extraordinary women whose families would shape the direction that the Wars of the Roses would take; Jacquetta Woodville and Catherine de Valois. Both women married for love and this love would shape who would win the crown of England, as Bicheno explains:
Sometimes love does conquer all: despite having turned their backs on the game of power, Catherine and Jacquetta became the common ancestors of every English monarch since 1485. Before that could happen, all those with a superior claim to the throne had first to wipe each other out. This they did in what was, in essence, a decades-long, murderously sordid dispute over an inheritance within a deeply dysfunctional extended family. It became merciless not despite but because the combatants had so much in common, and projected their own darkest intentions onto each other….it was an extraordinary period in English history. Four of the six kings crowned between 1399 and 1485 were usurpers who killed their predecessors, undermining the concept of divine right as well as the prestige of the ruling class. (Bicheno, 10-11).
Family drama is the center of Bicheno’s book so he spends several chapters laying out the major players and how they were related to one another. This can get a tad bit confusing for those who are not familiar with the story, so Bicheno has included family trees and a list of protagonists and marriages to help readers. I will say that they became very useful for me as I was reading this book and I would highly suggest you use the resources that Bicheno has included in this book for future research. Bicheno also included maps, which corresponded with the different battles that were important between 1440 and 1462, not only in England but in France, Wales, and Scotland as well.
What really impressed me about this book was the amount of detail that Bicheno was able to include and making it understandable for any casual student of the Wars of the Roses, yet engaging enough for a scholar. That is not an easy feat, but Bicheno is able to do it. He uses modern data with extensive research of historical documents, knowledge of medieval military strategies, and interpreting all of this information for modern readers, which included a few nods to a certain popular show(Game of Thrones) that is roughly based off of the events of this time period.
Hugh Bicheno breathes new life into the study of the Wars of the Roses. I wasn’t really sure what to expect when I first started reading this book, but I am extremely glad I did. Even if you think you know tons about the Wars of the Roses, this book will surprise you with new information and make you question your previous knowledge about the battles in the first part of this tumultuous time. If you have an interest in the Wars of the Roses and understanding how it occurred from a military and a political point of view, I highly suggest you read Hugh Bicheno’s book, “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462”. It is an eye-opening, riveting reading experience.
December 27, 2023
I found this book a little odd. I've read quite a bit on the Wars of the Roses and I actually found this confusing as it jumped about so much and at times I felt like there was too much detail about things that weren't directly relevant. It's always confusing when there are many people with the same name and titles passing through a family - especially when the author themselves gets themselves in a muddle!
The author was pretty hard on Henry VI (I'm not excusing him, he was a dreadful king!) but it seems that Margaret of Anjou could do no wrong! If something goes amiss, it's misfortune, not down to her. The author also makes some really odd statements, but there are very few references, so these sweeping statements are unsubstantiated as well as being bizarre! Apparently Warwick was a serial killer (??!?), Cecily, Duchess of York never forgave her husband for 'abandoning' her after Ludford Bridge and while Edward IV was illegitimate (as apparently Richard III looked like his father) and his brothers both knew, Edward of Westminster definitely wasn't and absolutely no one believed it at the time, honest. I think genetics isn't that simple - yes, Edward IV was exceptionally tall, but then so were some of his ancestors, so just because his parents weren't... that's a very simplistic, child-like view. Oh, and Richard III standing only about 5' tall due to his Scoliosis is clearly nonsense - if the author can't be bothered to do a little homework here, it makes you wonder about everything else.
Suggesting Shakespeare is a 'good' source and quoting Game of Thrones doesn't do a lot for credibility either. Laughably, George RR Martin was inspired to write his books having read Maurice Druon's The Accursed King's series (they were originally in French, but have ben translated), being about the French royal family - not the Wars of the Roses.
To conclude, there are better and clearer books on the subject. Lots of areas where authors don't agree, but this one was uneven and, in places, unsubstantiated and just plain wrong.
The author was pretty hard on Henry VI (I'm not excusing him, he was a dreadful king!) but it seems that Margaret of Anjou could do no wrong! If something goes amiss, it's misfortune, not down to her. The author also makes some really odd statements, but there are very few references, so these sweeping statements are unsubstantiated as well as being bizarre! Apparently Warwick was a serial killer (??!?), Cecily, Duchess of York never forgave her husband for 'abandoning' her after Ludford Bridge and while Edward IV was illegitimate (as apparently Richard III looked like his father) and his brothers both knew, Edward of Westminster definitely wasn't and absolutely no one believed it at the time, honest. I think genetics isn't that simple - yes, Edward IV was exceptionally tall, but then so were some of his ancestors, so just because his parents weren't... that's a very simplistic, child-like view. Oh, and Richard III standing only about 5' tall due to his Scoliosis is clearly nonsense - if the author can't be bothered to do a little homework here, it makes you wonder about everything else.
Suggesting Shakespeare is a 'good' source and quoting Game of Thrones doesn't do a lot for credibility either. Laughably, George RR Martin was inspired to write his books having read Maurice Druon's The Accursed King's series (they were originally in French, but have ben translated), being about the French royal family - not the Wars of the Roses.
To conclude, there are better and clearer books on the subject. Lots of areas where authors don't agree, but this one was uneven and, in places, unsubstantiated and just plain wrong.
June 12, 2024
I'm in the middle of a Wars of the Roses phase, and this is a good counter-weight to the Alison Weir book about them. At first I was hesitant, b/c flipping through the pages there were a lot of diagrams of battles, which I find impossible to follow sans an overhead projector and a tenured professor of history going over them. And he goes down some comically deep rabbit holes in terms of marriages, affinities, etc. But there are also lots of great familial charts, tables of the peerage, and that sort of thing. And the chapters are focused on 1 "character" and are short and easy to get through. One thing to note about him - he posits that Edward IV's bastardy is more than likely true, which, for example, the author of The Brothers York certainly didn't seem to do, nor did Weir. They mentioned but mainly did so to show the treachery of Richard/Clarence for politicizing, not to give agency to the rumors. Makes me want to read that book again. At any rate, I'm also reading the second book in this series now, which I like a bit more (maybe just b/c some of this knowledge is really starting to solidify in my mind).
January 3, 2018
Giving it a 5 for detail and thoroughness. This book is a slog, and I will probably forget 95% of the details, but I did enjoy reading it. Bicheno sorts out this confusing time, all the personalities involved, blow by blow battles, and tells us about the practice of warfare in the 15th Century.
The TV program "The Hollow Crown," made Queen Marguerite into an unfaithful, controlling witch. Bicheno gives her credit for being faithful in all respects to Henry VI. She tried to make a king out of a man who never should have been one. I'm more inclined to believe Bicheno.
He suggests that Edward IV (who wrested the throne from Henry) was not Richard, Duke of York's son, and therefore was not actually entitled to be king. There were always rumors. Nevertheless, Edward battled through to become it.
If you're interested in English history, this book tells all, from 1540-1564.
The TV program "The Hollow Crown," made Queen Marguerite into an unfaithful, controlling witch. Bicheno gives her credit for being faithful in all respects to Henry VI. She tried to make a king out of a man who never should have been one. I'm more inclined to believe Bicheno.
He suggests that Edward IV (who wrested the throne from Henry) was not Richard, Duke of York's son, and therefore was not actually entitled to be king. There were always rumors. Nevertheless, Edward battled through to become it.
If you're interested in English history, this book tells all, from 1540-1564.
April 28, 2025
Good overview of the first part of the War of the Roses, but the descriptions of certain events (especially the battles of the period) are extremely brief and needed to be fleshed out to the same level as the descriptions on politics. For example, I almost missed that Richard, Duke of York (father to Edward IV NOT Richard III) died at Wakefield since the author spent THREE SENTENCES on the death of one of the main players of the first part of the Wars. I’d start with Dan Jones “War of the Roses” for an overview and then move to this if you want more archeological/technical look at events.
December 7, 2017
I was looking for a readable popular history of the period and that's exactly what I got. It read fast and provided insights into the whys and hows of War of the Roses politics that I didn't have. (E.G. Archeology to reconstruct battles. Explanations of "affinities" and how people like the Duke of York could just raise armies until they couldn't. Etc.) And it kept the narrative straight. I'm not an expert on the period so I can't comment on accuracy, but I thought it was great.
July 26, 2021
While this is an excellent, detailed history of the subject, the author appears to me to be at least slightly biased in favor of the Lancastrians, or at least in Queen Marguerite's favor. He completely buys into the rumor that Edward of March, York's heir, was not actually York's son, and uses this to bolster his theories regarding both Richard and Edward's behavior.
November 18, 2017
I️ enjoyed this book. I️ started it because I’ve always been interested in the Wars of the Roses but I’ve never been the type to be able to finish a dense historical book. The narrative of this book was great and held my attention. I’m very much looking forward to finishing up his next book.
September 26, 2018
Book 1 of 2 on the background and causes of the Wars of the Roses. Seems to be very well researched and extremely well explained, whilst still coming up with some theories and insights that I have not heard anywhere else before even though this is my favourite bit of history.
July 16, 2024
3.5 stars, but rounded up as I perhaps didn’t follow the complexities of the many characters. It’s not a subject I have read about in any detail before, so I can’t comment on the author’s partialities. Overall it’s a reasonable account of the first part of the War of the Roses.
May 22, 2017
The telling of the War of Roses is done in an excellent manner. This is a must read for history buffs.
October 26, 2017
Quite possibly the driest book I've ever read on the subject.
October 8, 2018
Good narrative of Henry VI reign. Filled in a period of English history of which I was Ignorant.
February 2, 2019
Well written and interesting but requires a passing familiarity to be fully appreciated.
January 19, 2020
An interesting and certainly readable overview but probably too confusing for a newcomer to the subject and marred by unfortunate errors in genealogical trees and map scales.
April 18, 2020
Ideal book if you are interested in the War ofvthe Roses. Plenty of detail and insights.
August 31, 2022
Unclear references to nobles - switching between title and name….
September 19, 2023
It had a lot of useful information I used for my coursework on Henry VI and it was interesting to read from a historians point of view of wars.
February 15, 2024
Very useful maps and appendix of English peerage of the period helps keep the names and relationships of the individuals clear.
November 2, 2024
Really intriguing and in depth look at the first 22 years of the War of the Roses. A weak monarch with over ambitious underlings can really cause a chaotic scene.
January 6, 2017
A really easy to read book full of great information.
April 15, 2017
Terrible book full of fictions, aside from claiming Richard's scoliosis made him deformed and under 5ft tall (this has been debunked ), the author also claims the Edward IV was the result of an affair. Of course this tale has been spread before . The author claims as evidence that none of Edwards 3 brothers or his father looked like him , of course he obviously does not know Clarence and Edmund looked exactly like him . Avoid .
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews