What do you think?
Rate this book
The Brothers York: A Royal Tragedy
Vicious battles, powerful monarchs, and royal intrigue abound in this “gripping, complex, and sensational” (Hilary Mantel) true story of the War of the Roses—a struggle among three brothers, two of whom became kings, and the inspiration for Shakespeare’s renowned play, Richard III.
In 15th-century England, two royal families, the House of York and the House of Lancaster, fought a bitter, decades-long civil war for the English throne. As their symbols were a red rose for Lancaster and a white rose for York, the conflict became known as the Wars of the Roses.
During this time, the house of York came to dominate England. At its heart were three charismatic brothers—King Edward IV, and his two younger siblings George and Richard—who became the figureheads of a spectacular ruling dynasty. Together, they looked invincible.
But with Edward’s ascendancy the brothers began to turn on one another, unleashing a catastrophic chain of rebellion, vendetta, fratricide, usurpation, and regicide. The brutal end came at Bosworth Field in 1485, with the death of the youngest, then Richard III, at the hands of a new usurper, Henry Tudor, later Henry VII, progenitor of the Tudor line of monarchs.
Fascinating, dramatic, and filled with vivid historical detail, The Brothers York is a brilliant account of a conflict that fractured England for a generation. Riven by internal rivalries, jealousy, and infighting, the three York brothers failed to sustain their power and instead self-destructed. It is a rich and bloody tale as gripping as any historical fiction.
In 15th-century England, two royal families, the House of York and the House of Lancaster, fought a bitter, decades-long civil war for the English throne. As their symbols were a red rose for Lancaster and a white rose for York, the conflict became known as the Wars of the Roses.
During this time, the house of York came to dominate England. At its heart were three charismatic brothers—King Edward IV, and his two younger siblings George and Richard—who became the figureheads of a spectacular ruling dynasty. Together, they looked invincible.
But with Edward’s ascendancy the brothers began to turn on one another, unleashing a catastrophic chain of rebellion, vendetta, fratricide, usurpation, and regicide. The brutal end came at Bosworth Field in 1485, with the death of the youngest, then Richard III, at the hands of a new usurper, Henry Tudor, later Henry VII, progenitor of the Tudor line of monarchs.
Fascinating, dramatic, and filled with vivid historical detail, The Brothers York is a brilliant account of a conflict that fractured England for a generation. Riven by internal rivalries, jealousy, and infighting, the three York brothers failed to sustain their power and instead self-destructed. It is a rich and bloody tale as gripping as any historical fiction.
688 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 3, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 204 reviews
March 17, 2021
Thomas Penn's account of the York brothers, Edward (IV), Clarence and Richard (III), the sons of Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York (1411-1460) is enjoyable and lively. It is an account of a period of history, the later Plantagenet period and the war of the roses, that was significant and formative in what happened during and after 1485.
The story of the leading families and the dominant houses of York and Lancaster is one of deceit, murder, violence, rebellion, battles and war and treachery in a period where Britain was seeing changes with its feudal system and the demographic and economic aftermath of the Black Death; new technology, a resurgent and powerful France, and trade embargoes and disputes.
The author writes of these and those who were involved in good detail and with pace and verve. But, and why I rate this as a strong three stars, is there is no analysis or deeper discussion about the men and women involved. The points I mention above in respect of economy and politics is discussed at a, for me, too brief and light a level. There is little or no insight into how these men influenced each other, became powerful and forged alliances and influence to create the conditions for treason, war and murder. How did they communicate with each other at home and indeed abroad directly and through third-parties? How were the wars funded against a rising cost of wages and inflation with fewer men to serve the ranks and support the armies, and also work and keep their estates running as they chased around the country? How did the taxes needed and raised for war impact the people's morale and influence the rebellions that needed to be stoked or put down? Given religion is such a strong influence and deliberator in royal and high-status lives (and indeed across society as a whole) how was the church influencing and trying to progress, change or seek outcomes?
Overall, a good, gripping and exciting account of Edward, Clarence and Richard and their lives and times but lacking the analysis and depth that the book, the main characters and the subject deserves.
The story of the leading families and the dominant houses of York and Lancaster is one of deceit, murder, violence, rebellion, battles and war and treachery in a period where Britain was seeing changes with its feudal system and the demographic and economic aftermath of the Black Death; new technology, a resurgent and powerful France, and trade embargoes and disputes.
The author writes of these and those who were involved in good detail and with pace and verve. But, and why I rate this as a strong three stars, is there is no analysis or deeper discussion about the men and women involved. The points I mention above in respect of economy and politics is discussed at a, for me, too brief and light a level. There is little or no insight into how these men influenced each other, became powerful and forged alliances and influence to create the conditions for treason, war and murder. How did they communicate with each other at home and indeed abroad directly and through third-parties? How were the wars funded against a rising cost of wages and inflation with fewer men to serve the ranks and support the armies, and also work and keep their estates running as they chased around the country? How did the taxes needed and raised for war impact the people's morale and influence the rebellions that needed to be stoked or put down? Given religion is such a strong influence and deliberator in royal and high-status lives (and indeed across society as a whole) how was the church influencing and trying to progress, change or seek outcomes?
Overall, a good, gripping and exciting account of Edward, Clarence and Richard and their lives and times but lacking the analysis and depth that the book, the main characters and the subject deserves.
September 27, 2019
The book starts in the year 1461 with the rivalry between the Houses of York and Lancaster rumbling on in the ‘Wars of the Roses’. Currently, Lancastrians are ascendant with Henry VI as king but he is weak although his wife Margaret of Anjou is most definitely not. The Yorkist leader is Richard whose three sons are the subject of this book. Edward the future Edward IV, George and Richard (III). The book started with the fantastic image of three suns in the sky, a prophetic harbinger of things to come. The events described in this book make HBO’s Succession look like a polite tea party!
I really enjoyed this meticulous book which explained this period with great clarity. I think a cast of characters would be very helpful as even though I have a background in history and know this period reasonably well, I thought my head would explode as it felt like a cast of five thousand! Particular respect goes to Margaret of Anjou whose astute leadership made the Yorkists life difficult and to Warwick, the Kingmaker whose ambitious machinations and hunger for power often dominates the proceedings.
What of the brothers? Edward reminds me so much of Henry VIII - they even look alike! Edward looks the part. He wants to dazzle, he’s ruthless but prone to bingeing and womanising, he has periods of manic energy followed by listlessness. He constantly has to fight to maintain his crown as his claim is flimsy (1461 -70, 71-83) and indeed looses it for a spell. George, Duke of Clarence is sensitive, pushy, power hungry, duplicitous, jealous, an ingrate with a huge sense of entitlement. He betrays his brothers and is murdered. Richard is probably the best of the bunch despite how he has been portrayed. He is tall, slim, courageous, very clever and bookish, intense, a skilled soldier with firm views on knightly conduct, loyal to Edward, trustworthy and reliable. As time went on the pain of his scoliosis is evident. As king he says the right thing but circumstances forced changes to his agenda. We’ll draw a veil over the fate of the princes as we simply don’t know and Thomas Penn rightly made no conclusions.
The book clearly shows how the country is ripped apart almost family by family. This is one of the most tragic periods in our history which Penn demonstrates very well . It’s got everything a fictional thriller contains from treachery to murder, recklessness to betrayal and everything in between. I would have liked a bigger focus on the three men themselves as that is what the title implies as I felt it is more a documentary of the period. I would have liked more assessment or analysis of them possibly in some sort of conclusion which it lacked. If you want to understand more about the period then this book ticks all the boxes and is highly recommended. Thank you for the opportunity to read this ARC.
I really enjoyed this meticulous book which explained this period with great clarity. I think a cast of characters would be very helpful as even though I have a background in history and know this period reasonably well, I thought my head would explode as it felt like a cast of five thousand! Particular respect goes to Margaret of Anjou whose astute leadership made the Yorkists life difficult and to Warwick, the Kingmaker whose ambitious machinations and hunger for power often dominates the proceedings.
What of the brothers? Edward reminds me so much of Henry VIII - they even look alike! Edward looks the part. He wants to dazzle, he’s ruthless but prone to bingeing and womanising, he has periods of manic energy followed by listlessness. He constantly has to fight to maintain his crown as his claim is flimsy (1461 -70, 71-83) and indeed looses it for a spell. George, Duke of Clarence is sensitive, pushy, power hungry, duplicitous, jealous, an ingrate with a huge sense of entitlement. He betrays his brothers and is murdered. Richard is probably the best of the bunch despite how he has been portrayed. He is tall, slim, courageous, very clever and bookish, intense, a skilled soldier with firm views on knightly conduct, loyal to Edward, trustworthy and reliable. As time went on the pain of his scoliosis is evident. As king he says the right thing but circumstances forced changes to his agenda. We’ll draw a veil over the fate of the princes as we simply don’t know and Thomas Penn rightly made no conclusions.
The book clearly shows how the country is ripped apart almost family by family. This is one of the most tragic periods in our history which Penn demonstrates very well . It’s got everything a fictional thriller contains from treachery to murder, recklessness to betrayal and everything in between. I would have liked a bigger focus on the three men themselves as that is what the title implies as I felt it is more a documentary of the period. I would have liked more assessment or analysis of them possibly in some sort of conclusion which it lacked. If you want to understand more about the period then this book ticks all the boxes and is highly recommended. Thank you for the opportunity to read this ARC.
September 29, 2019
Although this claims to 'cast[s] the War of the Roses in a fresh light' I'm not convinced that it does - which doesn't detract from the story at all, but I'm not sure there's anything new here. Penn's intent of focusing on the three York brothers - Edward, George and Richard - becomes skewed as Edward doesn't die till close to the end of the book and only the final 15% or so concentrates on Richard's 'power grab' (as Penn would likely say). Clarence has his moment in the middle of the book, as we'd expect.
This is definitely a cross-over book: it's written with an eye on a generalist audience and uses familiar and studiedly unacademic language ('as the leader of a power bloc', 'with the Yorkists positioning themselves as the champions of big business', 'they were unprepared for the bombshell Edward now dropped') to tell its story. Superscripts are kept to a minimum but 15% of the Kindle edition is endnotes and references so it appears to be sourced properly.
As someone who only knows this story via fiction, I was interested to read a history. I especially like that Penn clarifies the complicated politics between France, Burgundy and the warring English factions. Also any fans of Dunnett's House of Niccolo Series will be delighted to find the alum monopoly here as well as Tommaso Portinari, the Medici representative in Bruges, making an appearance.
That said, it's disappointing that Penn glosses over the mystery of the princes in the tower without explicitly acknowledging that we don't know what happened - the boys just 'disappear'. I'd have been interested in his view, even if speculative, perhaps as an afterword. He also restores Richard's back problems (scoliosis) and a raised shoulder.
Penn doesn't seem to like anyone though does seem unbiased - everyone's pretty reprehensible in this story! This isn't the liveliest of histories but it feels more grounded than some of the more popular retellings. An informative and detailed read.
Thanks to Penguin for an ARC via NetGalley.
This is definitely a cross-over book: it's written with an eye on a generalist audience and uses familiar and studiedly unacademic language ('as the leader of a power bloc', 'with the Yorkists positioning themselves as the champions of big business', 'they were unprepared for the bombshell Edward now dropped') to tell its story. Superscripts are kept to a minimum but 15% of the Kindle edition is endnotes and references so it appears to be sourced properly.
As someone who only knows this story via fiction, I was interested to read a history. I especially like that Penn clarifies the complicated politics between France, Burgundy and the warring English factions. Also any fans of Dunnett's House of Niccolo Series will be delighted to find the alum monopoly here as well as Tommaso Portinari, the Medici representative in Bruges, making an appearance.
That said, it's disappointing that Penn glosses over the mystery of the princes in the tower without explicitly acknowledging that we don't know what happened - the boys just 'disappear'. I'd have been interested in his view, even if speculative, perhaps as an afterword. He also restores Richard's back problems (scoliosis) and a raised shoulder.
Penn doesn't seem to like anyone though does seem unbiased - everyone's pretty reprehensible in this story! This isn't the liveliest of histories but it feels more grounded than some of the more popular retellings. An informative and detailed read.
Thanks to Penguin for an ARC via NetGalley.
Read
February 25, 2021A good overview of the period covered by Shakespeare in the Henry VI/Richard III sequence. One thing that really comes across is, frankly, what a shambles it all was. Men scrapping in the mud, lies, cheating, outright theft and murder, all covered with a tissue thin layer of religion and monarchy and whatever. It's very clarifying about the period and its politics and how the Yorkist internecine squabbles and their ramifications ended up ripping England apart for a century. Interesting and even-handed on Richard III, who clearly had both potential and intentions to rule well, but was all too easily driven into a paranoid death spiral. Penn doesn't take an overt stance on who killed the princes in the tower, but also doesn't give any space to implausible theories of how Henry Tudor could have arranged their deaths from France while being a nonentity.
(Let me pause here to say that if you are even now typing up a furious defence of Richard III, planning to recommend me The Daughter of Time, etc, kindly save us both the effort and don't.)
It's a good read, not perhaps as zippy as Winter King: Henry VII and the Dawn of Tudor England but then I knew more about the period to start with. Also a slightly weird hammering on how fat Edward IV got, which once noticed became a bit obtrusive in the repetition. Overall a solid and engaging read though rather disheartening in that it's 700-odd pages with absolutely nobody to like. But that's history for you.
(Let me pause here to say that if you are even now typing up a furious defence of Richard III, planning to recommend me The Daughter of Time, etc, kindly save us both the effort and don't.)
It's a good read, not perhaps as zippy as Winter King: Henry VII and the Dawn of Tudor England but then I knew more about the period to start with. Also a slightly weird hammering on how fat Edward IV got, which once noticed became a bit obtrusive in the repetition. Overall a solid and engaging read though rather disheartening in that it's 700-odd pages with absolutely nobody to like. But that's history for you.
June 26, 2022
This book is doing something odd, which is bothering me. The opposing sides are both named-King Edward and Henry VI; Henry’s son is also Edward; there is of course brother Richard, but the entire book calls the middle brother Clarence like that’s his name as everyone else is named. Ummm his name is GEORGE. CLARENCE is his title. I dont know why this being done. I mean he’s an extreme pain in the ass but who wasn’t at this time in history? He is the only one who is referred to in this manner. Not even any of the nobility is called by their titles. Can anyone shed a light on his for me please? I’d appreciate that.
January 13, 2021
This is a chronicle of the War of the Roses with an emphasis on the infighting, plotting, sedition and murders engaged in by the three York brothers, King Edward IV, George Duke of Clarence and King Richard III. It is a complicated and dense story and I keep thinking that if I read about this period enough times I will finally get a grip on all of the characters and events. That hasn’t happened yet, but this book helped. It was well researched and written and not too dry. The narration by Roy McMillan was excellent.
October 11, 2019
For a vast proportion of my life, I was convinced that I felt nothing but total contempt and disinterest when it came to the topic of history and as a consequence avoided it. But this book has reignited my love of history and focuses solely on the House of York and the fact that it managed to destroy itself from the inside out. This is a complex and compulsively readable political thriller and manages to tell the story of the House of York and its eventual downfall in a very engaging fashion; quite how Mr Penn achieves the perfect balance between information and drama is beyond me. An astonishing feat of writing. It doesn't take long before you are as gripped as you would be with a superb fiction book; it certainly is more fascinating than many other similar reads.
Lively and accessible, you can see just how passionate Penn is about the topic as he writes with such flowing language and no amount of effort was spared trying to keep this as interesting and absorbing as it was. It has undoubtedly become the author's labour of love and I imagine it took a long time to compile. His writing is infectious and definitely lightens up the subject meaning more people will enjoy it. It is clear it has been crafted to attract non-history readers and those who appreciate highly informative book but also those easy and quick to get through. A definitive, detail-centric story and rightly holds a mirror up to the mistakes made by brothers Edward, George and Richard. A superb read. Many thanks to Allen Lane for an ARC.
Lively and accessible, you can see just how passionate Penn is about the topic as he writes with such flowing language and no amount of effort was spared trying to keep this as interesting and absorbing as it was. It has undoubtedly become the author's labour of love and I imagine it took a long time to compile. His writing is infectious and definitely lightens up the subject meaning more people will enjoy it. It is clear it has been crafted to attract non-history readers and those who appreciate highly informative book but also those easy and quick to get through. A definitive, detail-centric story and rightly holds a mirror up to the mistakes made by brothers Edward, George and Richard. A superb read. Many thanks to Allen Lane for an ARC.
September 9, 2021
Even though the “Wars of the Roses” is the posthumous name given to the civil war battles for the English crown between the House of York and the House of Lancaster; the last hurrah before the Tudor dynasty was ultimately York against York. When King Edward IV was on the throne (historically known for his scandalous marriage to Elizabeth Woodville); some of his biggest rivals were his brothers: George, Duke of Clarence who tried to overthrow Edward and popular in lore for allegedly meeting his end in a tub of malmsey wine; and Richard III – whom we all know as the Hunchback who murdered his own nephews (also debatable). Instead of forming a united front; the three York brothers shattered their house and brought it to ruin. Thomas Penn- author of the fabulous “Winter King”- attempts to break down the inter-locking events between the brothers in, “The Brothers York: A Royal Tragedy”.
Penn’s “The Brothers York” is touted as the complete and definitive analysis of the interactions and political events between Edward, George and Richard bordering a psychological review. It is unfortunately not that. Rather, “The Brothers York” is an exhaustive and in-depth chronological re-telling of Edward’s reign with the occasional throw-in of George and Richard (the discussion of Richard’s reign begins approximately at the 500-page mark). Penn hones in on Edward’s time on the throne with a microscopic eye that is founded on a mountain of research. “The Brothers York” reveals intimate details that most other texts on the subject lack and thus even though readers familiar with the subject will be presented with new information.
That being said; this very heavy and scholarly angle causes “The Brothers York” to be clouded with too much intricacy and tangents that could have been skimmed down and would have resulted in an easier to digest piece. The way it stands now makes the text somewhat slow and only readable with ample rest breaks. Some readers may find this to be distracting and difficult to retain.
The focus of the text is heavily political and battle-driven completely missing the aim of what the hypothesis claims of the brotherly interactions. The title could easily be renamed, “Edward IV” and would be more logical. Yet, Penn does manage to use flowery, literary language that paints visuals and speeds the momentum (although he often states speculation or self-affirmations as facts). Penn would make a solid historical-fiction author.
Expanding on this, Penn fortunately doesn’t express blatant biases but he does try too hard to intermingle academia with modern familiar text (such as “party” and “link up”) that has no place in such a written piece and rather than disarm; actually deters readers. This is a Penn habit – and one he should break – as it is also a downfall in “Winter King”.
“The Brothers York” tends to be repetitive and tedious tempting the reader to skim portions. This is helped by being interspersed with quotes and primary source documentation which strengthens Penn’s writing. “The Brothers York” also falls victim to some continuity errors and editing flaws (i.e. page 494 calling the coronation feast a ‘wedding feast’). Was the editor overwhelmed by the lengthy-paged volume?
Penn’s notable strong-suit is his fine-tune depictions of battles and military formations that are both informative and gripping even to those readers not usually interested in such matters. “The Brothers York” manages to be emotive and brings readers directly to the scene of the events. It is quite astounding that Penn had such detail to offer almost as though he experienced the scenes, himself.
The section concerning Richard III is noticeably rushed with a less micro-glimpse although Penn does offer underlying ‘food for thought’ regarding Richard’s actions and therefore “The Brothers York” is more than a simple Richard III biography. Penn concludes “The Brothers York” with an eye on the Battle of Bosworth and an abridged breakdown of Henry VII followed by an epilogue summarizing both the text and the York brothers.
Penn solidifies “The Brothers York” with not one but two sections of color photo plates containing images not displayed in other similar history pieces (the photo plates tend to be the same throughout common-texts). “The Brothers York” also features a Notes section (not annotated) and a lengthy and satisfying bibliography complete with extensive primary and secondary resources.
“The Brothers York” is a strong-enough and highly in-depth look at the reign of Edward IV and some of the brotherly conflicts with George and Richard. From this perspective, “The Brothers York” is quite good. However, this was not the blurb description (or title) of the text as it claimed to psycho- and- politically analyze the brothers and break down their relations with a fresh perspective. In this sense, Penn missed his target and instead offered an Edward IV biography. Despite this major absence and other minor flaws; “The Brothers York” is indeed suggested for readers interested in the Wars of the Roses and the House of York.
Penn’s “The Brothers York” is touted as the complete and definitive analysis of the interactions and political events between Edward, George and Richard bordering a psychological review. It is unfortunately not that. Rather, “The Brothers York” is an exhaustive and in-depth chronological re-telling of Edward’s reign with the occasional throw-in of George and Richard (the discussion of Richard’s reign begins approximately at the 500-page mark). Penn hones in on Edward’s time on the throne with a microscopic eye that is founded on a mountain of research. “The Brothers York” reveals intimate details that most other texts on the subject lack and thus even though readers familiar with the subject will be presented with new information.
That being said; this very heavy and scholarly angle causes “The Brothers York” to be clouded with too much intricacy and tangents that could have been skimmed down and would have resulted in an easier to digest piece. The way it stands now makes the text somewhat slow and only readable with ample rest breaks. Some readers may find this to be distracting and difficult to retain.
The focus of the text is heavily political and battle-driven completely missing the aim of what the hypothesis claims of the brotherly interactions. The title could easily be renamed, “Edward IV” and would be more logical. Yet, Penn does manage to use flowery, literary language that paints visuals and speeds the momentum (although he often states speculation or self-affirmations as facts). Penn would make a solid historical-fiction author.
Expanding on this, Penn fortunately doesn’t express blatant biases but he does try too hard to intermingle academia with modern familiar text (such as “party” and “link up”) that has no place in such a written piece and rather than disarm; actually deters readers. This is a Penn habit – and one he should break – as it is also a downfall in “Winter King”.
“The Brothers York” tends to be repetitive and tedious tempting the reader to skim portions. This is helped by being interspersed with quotes and primary source documentation which strengthens Penn’s writing. “The Brothers York” also falls victim to some continuity errors and editing flaws (i.e. page 494 calling the coronation feast a ‘wedding feast’). Was the editor overwhelmed by the lengthy-paged volume?
Penn’s notable strong-suit is his fine-tune depictions of battles and military formations that are both informative and gripping even to those readers not usually interested in such matters. “The Brothers York” manages to be emotive and brings readers directly to the scene of the events. It is quite astounding that Penn had such detail to offer almost as though he experienced the scenes, himself.
The section concerning Richard III is noticeably rushed with a less micro-glimpse although Penn does offer underlying ‘food for thought’ regarding Richard’s actions and therefore “The Brothers York” is more than a simple Richard III biography. Penn concludes “The Brothers York” with an eye on the Battle of Bosworth and an abridged breakdown of Henry VII followed by an epilogue summarizing both the text and the York brothers.
Penn solidifies “The Brothers York” with not one but two sections of color photo plates containing images not displayed in other similar history pieces (the photo plates tend to be the same throughout common-texts). “The Brothers York” also features a Notes section (not annotated) and a lengthy and satisfying bibliography complete with extensive primary and secondary resources.
“The Brothers York” is a strong-enough and highly in-depth look at the reign of Edward IV and some of the brotherly conflicts with George and Richard. From this perspective, “The Brothers York” is quite good. However, this was not the blurb description (or title) of the text as it claimed to psycho- and- politically analyze the brothers and break down their relations with a fresh perspective. In this sense, Penn missed his target and instead offered an Edward IV biography. Despite this major absence and other minor flaws; “The Brothers York” is indeed suggested for readers interested in the Wars of the Roses and the House of York.
April 19, 2020
I blame the parents...
Penn starts this history of the three York brothers with the background story of the weak King Henry VI, surrounded by venal lords and constantly threatened by Richard, Duke of York, father of the three brothers, who had a competing claim to the throne through the female line. He then takes us in a linear fashion through the downfall of Henry, and the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III, ending with Richard’s downfall and the rise to power of Henry VII, the first of the Tudors.
Penn writes very well, avoiding academic jargon and taking plenty of time to fill in the characters of the people he’s discussing. He assumes no prior knowledge, which as a newcomer to the period I found extremely helpful since it meant I never found myself floundering over unexplained references, as can often happen with history books.
The bulk of the book concentrates on the reign of Edward IV, which makes sense since he ruled for over twenty years whereas the middle brother George, Duke of Clarence, never got to be king and the youngest brother, Richard III, managed a mere two years before he lost his crown, and his life along with it. Unfortunately, Richard is by far the more interesting king (in my opinion), so I’d have been happier to spend more time in his company and rather less on Edward’s interminable taxes and squabbles with France and Burgundy. I have a feeling this says far more about my dilettante approach to history than it does about the book, however! But after an excellent start with all the intrigue and fighting leading up to Edward’s final power grab, I found my interest dipped for quite a long period in the middle of the book as Penn laid out the detail of his long reign.
It picks up again when Edward finally dies, and the nefarious Richard usurps the throne from his nephew. Richard’s reign might have been short but it’s full of incident and Penn tells it excellently. Intriguingly, although of course he relates the story of the Princes in the Tower, Penn doesn’t tell us his own opinion as to whether Richard was guilty of their murder or not. I suppose this makes sense, since (weirdly) there are still strong factions on either side of that question and he’d have been bound to alienate half his readership whichever position he took. He gives enough detail of the event and the contemporaneous rumours around it for the reader to make up her own mind, if she hasn’t already. (Yes, of course Richard was guilty, if you’re wondering... ;) )
Penn finishes as Richard’s reign comes to its tragic/well-deserved* end, rounding the story off with an uber-quick résumé of Henry VII and the Tudors, explaining how the Yorkist divide gradually diminished over time.
Overall, this is an excellent history, plainly but well told. I’d say it’s aimed more at the general reader than an academic audience, and is particularly good as an introduction to the period – I’m not sure that there’s much new in it for people who already have a solid understanding of the time of the York kings. It’s clearly well researched, with plenty of detail, and it covers all the major personalities of the time, not just the brothers. I came out of it feeling much clearer about how all the various well known names – Warwick, Elizabeth Woodville, Margaret of Anjou, etc. – fitted together, and what parts they played in the Yorkist story. I did struggle with the long middle section of Edward’s rather dull reign, but a historian really can’t be expected to make something exciting if it isn’t. But the first and last sections had more than enough treachery, betrayal and general skulduggery to satisfy even me! Recommended. 4½ stars for me, so rounded up.
*delete according to preference
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Allen Lane.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
Penn starts this history of the three York brothers with the background story of the weak King Henry VI, surrounded by venal lords and constantly threatened by Richard, Duke of York, father of the three brothers, who had a competing claim to the throne through the female line. He then takes us in a linear fashion through the downfall of Henry, and the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III, ending with Richard’s downfall and the rise to power of Henry VII, the first of the Tudors.
Penn writes very well, avoiding academic jargon and taking plenty of time to fill in the characters of the people he’s discussing. He assumes no prior knowledge, which as a newcomer to the period I found extremely helpful since it meant I never found myself floundering over unexplained references, as can often happen with history books.
The bulk of the book concentrates on the reign of Edward IV, which makes sense since he ruled for over twenty years whereas the middle brother George, Duke of Clarence, never got to be king and the youngest brother, Richard III, managed a mere two years before he lost his crown, and his life along with it. Unfortunately, Richard is by far the more interesting king (in my opinion), so I’d have been happier to spend more time in his company and rather less on Edward’s interminable taxes and squabbles with France and Burgundy. I have a feeling this says far more about my dilettante approach to history than it does about the book, however! But after an excellent start with all the intrigue and fighting leading up to Edward’s final power grab, I found my interest dipped for quite a long period in the middle of the book as Penn laid out the detail of his long reign.
It picks up again when Edward finally dies, and the nefarious Richard usurps the throne from his nephew. Richard’s reign might have been short but it’s full of incident and Penn tells it excellently. Intriguingly, although of course he relates the story of the Princes in the Tower, Penn doesn’t tell us his own opinion as to whether Richard was guilty of their murder or not. I suppose this makes sense, since (weirdly) there are still strong factions on either side of that question and he’d have been bound to alienate half his readership whichever position he took. He gives enough detail of the event and the contemporaneous rumours around it for the reader to make up her own mind, if she hasn’t already. (Yes, of course Richard was guilty, if you’re wondering... ;) )
Penn finishes as Richard’s reign comes to its tragic/well-deserved* end, rounding the story off with an uber-quick résumé of Henry VII and the Tudors, explaining how the Yorkist divide gradually diminished over time.
Overall, this is an excellent history, plainly but well told. I’d say it’s aimed more at the general reader than an academic audience, and is particularly good as an introduction to the period – I’m not sure that there’s much new in it for people who already have a solid understanding of the time of the York kings. It’s clearly well researched, with plenty of detail, and it covers all the major personalities of the time, not just the brothers. I came out of it feeling much clearer about how all the various well known names – Warwick, Elizabeth Woodville, Margaret of Anjou, etc. – fitted together, and what parts they played in the Yorkist story. I did struggle with the long middle section of Edward’s rather dull reign, but a historian really can’t be expected to make something exciting if it isn’t. But the first and last sections had more than enough treachery, betrayal and general skulduggery to satisfy even me! Recommended. 4½ stars for me, so rounded up.
*delete according to preference
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Allen Lane.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
April 4, 2021
The Brothers York is well written and provides excellent coverage of Edward IV's reign. Penn furnishes ample detail on virtually every aspect of Edward's government, from foreign affairs to domestic and economic policies. He also presents a passable picture of Edward's personal life. However, the book is weaker when it deals with the periods before Edward's ascent and after his death. In both instances, the author attempts to cover complex situations in far too summary a fashion.
March 25, 2023
"I warn you everyone,
for you should understand,
There sprang a rose in Rouen
and spread into England."
-Yorkist verse on Battle of Towton, 1461
Penn's masterful look at the Brothers York has to rank as one of my favorite books about the Three Sunnes of York (Edward, Clarence, and Richard). The Three Sunnes is in reference to the parhelion (a refraction of sunlight through ice crystals making it seem like multiple suns) that occurred on the morning of the Battle of Towton.
The White Rose of York is a study of a powerful Royal House that started with a great deal of potential, not only in good rulership, but also for commercial concerns in London, yet due to endemic infighting and Edward's extravagant lifestyle that ended in self-immolation.
Truth be told, the only winners of the Lancaster-York conflicts were the Tudors. Penn's excellent, and quite readable, history focuses not only on Edward IV, but also on Richard III. Using the latest historical information, Penn shows that Richard suffered from Scoliosis (a curvature of the spine, which Tudor propagandists turned into a hunchback), but was a fine warrior.
I also found it interesting in Penn's basic assertion that, while never explicitly stated, it was Richard who likely had the Twin Princes killed in the Tower. The reasoning is that it was Richard's men, one of whom much later was heavily rewarded and is the same person most believe to have killed the Twins at his behest. Thomas More always thought it was this servant (Miles Forest) that was the killer. Anyways, the guilt lay heavy with Richard while there is no direct proof of his guilt.
A wonderful history showing the grace and pageantry of the White Rose of York, as well as his extravagant decline brought on by the conflicts with his closest advisors and family. If you are interested in the reign of Edward IV and Richard III, then look no further than this book for an excellent history of that period.
for you should understand,
There sprang a rose in Rouen
and spread into England."
-Yorkist verse on Battle of Towton, 1461
Penn's masterful look at the Brothers York has to rank as one of my favorite books about the Three Sunnes of York (Edward, Clarence, and Richard). The Three Sunnes is in reference to the parhelion (a refraction of sunlight through ice crystals making it seem like multiple suns) that occurred on the morning of the Battle of Towton.
The White Rose of York is a study of a powerful Royal House that started with a great deal of potential, not only in good rulership, but also for commercial concerns in London, yet due to endemic infighting and Edward's extravagant lifestyle that ended in self-immolation.
Truth be told, the only winners of the Lancaster-York conflicts were the Tudors. Penn's excellent, and quite readable, history focuses not only on Edward IV, but also on Richard III. Using the latest historical information, Penn shows that Richard suffered from Scoliosis (a curvature of the spine, which Tudor propagandists turned into a hunchback), but was a fine warrior.
I also found it interesting in Penn's basic assertion that, while never explicitly stated, it was Richard who likely had the Twin Princes killed in the Tower. The reasoning is that it was Richard's men, one of whom much later was heavily rewarded and is the same person most believe to have killed the Twins at his behest. Thomas More always thought it was this servant (Miles Forest) that was the killer. Anyways, the guilt lay heavy with Richard while there is no direct proof of his guilt.
A wonderful history showing the grace and pageantry of the White Rose of York, as well as his extravagant decline brought on by the conflicts with his closest advisors and family. If you are interested in the reign of Edward IV and Richard III, then look no further than this book for an excellent history of that period.
December 31, 2019
thanks to netgalley and the publishers for a free copy in return for an open honest review.
This book is quite detailed in looking at the house of York from Richard through Edward IV and his siblings Clarence and Richard III and how the house imploded through infighting and changing politics in the struggles of late 15th century England. the book itself really enjoyed and a greater insight into the other part of the cousins war.
This book is quite detailed in looking at the house of York from Richard through Edward IV and his siblings Clarence and Richard III and how the house imploded through infighting and changing politics in the struggles of late 15th century England. the book itself really enjoyed and a greater insight into the other part of the cousins war.
November 16, 2019
Penn's narrative begins with the rise and Edward IV and his ascendancy over Henry VI in claiming the throne of England (1461), first sought by Edward's father Richard, Duke of York (1460). For those who are unfamiliar with this period, Penn's book provides a springboard from which to launch your own journey. All the major players and events are covered off in a detailed history that is neither dry nor sleep inducing.
I am in two minds with this book. On the one hand, it is a very well researched and engaging history of the Wars of the Roses, that was fascinating and dramatic. However, to me, it was more of a chronicle of the rise and fall of a prominent family, with a heavy focus of Edward, his court and courtiers, contemporary politics, peppered with quite a few side journeys into other areas which I found to be both distracting, unnecessary, and of no real interest to me.
I came into this with an already sound knowledge of the Wars of the Roses, so what I was hoping for was more of an analytical approach to the three brothers and their inter-personal relationships; I felt that there should have been more focus on this aspect to explain why the dynasty imploded ".. within a generation.." I guess I wanted a more psycho-analytical approach to explain the family dynamic - Edward (the sunne in splendour), George (the petulant middle child), Richard (the broody dark horse) - these explorations were few and far between. Edward's nepotism on a grand scale was hardly a secret and that this would have created bitterness and tension amongst his brothers and his supporters is not surprising but this is hardly unique as history is, quite frankly, full of similar stories.
I hugely enjoyed Penn's Winter King: The Dawn of Tudor England (bio on Henry Tudor) so was looking forward to this - but left feeling just a little disappointed in that it was not structured how I thought it would have been and really, for me personally, there was nothing that I had not already read in various other tomes.
As I mentioned, nothing should be taken away from this book as it is a quite good re-telling of the Wars of the Roses.
I am in two minds with this book. On the one hand, it is a very well researched and engaging history of the Wars of the Roses, that was fascinating and dramatic. However, to me, it was more of a chronicle of the rise and fall of a prominent family, with a heavy focus of Edward, his court and courtiers, contemporary politics, peppered with quite a few side journeys into other areas which I found to be both distracting, unnecessary, and of no real interest to me.
I came into this with an already sound knowledge of the Wars of the Roses, so what I was hoping for was more of an analytical approach to the three brothers and their inter-personal relationships; I felt that there should have been more focus on this aspect to explain why the dynasty imploded ".. within a generation.." I guess I wanted a more psycho-analytical approach to explain the family dynamic - Edward (the sunne in splendour), George (the petulant middle child), Richard (the broody dark horse) - these explorations were few and far between. Edward's nepotism on a grand scale was hardly a secret and that this would have created bitterness and tension amongst his brothers and his supporters is not surprising but this is hardly unique as history is, quite frankly, full of similar stories.
I hugely enjoyed Penn's Winter King: The Dawn of Tudor England (bio on Henry Tudor) so was looking forward to this - but left feeling just a little disappointed in that it was not structured how I thought it would have been and really, for me personally, there was nothing that I had not already read in various other tomes.
As I mentioned, nothing should be taken away from this book as it is a quite good re-telling of the Wars of the Roses.
December 4, 2019
I received a copy of this book via the author/publishers via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
This was a really expansive in-depth look at the rise and fall of both Kind Edward IV and his brother King Richard III, as well as some commentary around the history revolving the 'Princes in the Tower' and what could have happened to them. This book is about 70-80% King Edward IV, and the last 15% is King Richard III and the last 5% if even, looks at King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York with a brief paragraph on King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I.
As someone already very interested in this time period and the York rulers, and I have read historical fiction in the time period before (mainly Philippa Gregory's The White Queen series) and so was aware of some major events and players and this certainly helped. I think this is a very dense, richly packed book and you would need to have a general interest in the subject and the families to get a good enjoyment out of it.
I'm a fast reader but this book slowed my reading down considerably but it wasn't one I wanted to rush. I wanted to take in the history and understand the events and the causes and repercussions of them.
I really enjoyed this and it's very obvious that a lot of time and effort went into this book. It's not written in a way that's inaccessible to those who may not be history buffs but is also quite conversation and pleasant to read as well without losing the poignancy of the historical twists and turns.
This was a really expansive in-depth look at the rise and fall of both Kind Edward IV and his brother King Richard III, as well as some commentary around the history revolving the 'Princes in the Tower' and what could have happened to them. This book is about 70-80% King Edward IV, and the last 15% is King Richard III and the last 5% if even, looks at King Henry VII and Elizabeth of York with a brief paragraph on King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I.
As someone already very interested in this time period and the York rulers, and I have read historical fiction in the time period before (mainly Philippa Gregory's The White Queen series) and so was aware of some major events and players and this certainly helped. I think this is a very dense, richly packed book and you would need to have a general interest in the subject and the families to get a good enjoyment out of it.
I'm a fast reader but this book slowed my reading down considerably but it wasn't one I wanted to rush. I wanted to take in the history and understand the events and the causes and repercussions of them.
I really enjoyed this and it's very obvious that a lot of time and effort went into this book. It's not written in a way that's inaccessible to those who may not be history buffs but is also quite conversation and pleasant to read as well without losing the poignancy of the historical twists and turns.
March 25, 2026
For those like me interested in The Wars of the Roses, Thomas Penn has provided an unusual treat. While other histories have explained the various alliances, betrayals and power shifts that prolonged these wars, these explanations may not possess the full depth and complexity of the times.
Penn has done this. He has focused on one section, the end game. Most of this centers on Edward IV and his relationships to his brothers, Richard of Gloucester (later Richard III), and George, Duke of Clarence.
Penn provides an intimate look at the family dynamics between them that encompasses; the distribution of power, lands, royal marriages, and shifting political priorities in the most detailed way. This sheds much clearer light on things such as;, the breakdown with the Earl of Warrick, downfall of Clarence, and the princes in the tower.
Some readers may find this author’s style tedious but for those who love full detail and context, it is a rich work.
Penn has done this. He has focused on one section, the end game. Most of this centers on Edward IV and his relationships to his brothers, Richard of Gloucester (later Richard III), and George, Duke of Clarence.
Penn provides an intimate look at the family dynamics between them that encompasses; the distribution of power, lands, royal marriages, and shifting political priorities in the most detailed way. This sheds much clearer light on things such as;, the breakdown with the Earl of Warrick, downfall of Clarence, and the princes in the tower.
Some readers may find this author’s style tedious but for those who love full detail and context, it is a rich work.
July 12, 2020
For some reason I expected this to be Historical Fiction, but it turned out to be History. It's about the Wars of the Roses and the Brothers from the York dynasty who might have filled the place that the Tudor family does in history instead, if it hadn't been for in-fighting.
There are long chapters with just the occasional line break. As such it took me quite a long time to read it in small increments. It was also just a bit dry, but the subject is interesting and kept my attention. I found it amazing how England came so close to having a very different history!
Overall I really enjoyed the book and it filled in a big gap in the my knowledge of history. I do prefer historical accounts that tell the story of people rather than impersonal war statistics and this definitely fulfilled that preference for me.
There are long chapters with just the occasional line break. As such it took me quite a long time to read it in small increments. It was also just a bit dry, but the subject is interesting and kept my attention. I found it amazing how England came so close to having a very different history!
Overall I really enjoyed the book and it filled in a big gap in the my knowledge of history. I do prefer historical accounts that tell the story of people rather than impersonal war statistics and this definitely fulfilled that preference for me.
January 10, 2020
A few years ago Penn wrote a well liked biography of the first Tudor King Henry VII. This prequel homes in one aspect of the wars of the roses, the three sons of Richard of York.
It’s a solid and comprehensive survey; the disintegration of Henry VI’s rule , who may have been killed on the future Richard III’s orders, brought in the Yorkist Edward IV for a comparatively long but troubled reign . Edward was a shrewd politician but prone to howling blunders ; it’s arguable that by taking the Earldom of Richmond from Richard and giving it to Clarence , he fuelled Richards resentment. But the long game of balancing the twin Gallic kingdoms of France and Burgundy was played well. Edward was also, in stark contrast to Henry, a sex maniac and glutton. Illegitimate children don’t make for smooth dynastic successions.
Middle brother Clarence is a nastier and more treacherous sort than Shakespeare shows us ; contrary to Shakespeare , it’s Edward, not Richard, who has him killed, though Richard, already thirsty for power, was hardly sorry.
And so what of Richard the Third? It’s a mixed portrayal : he schemes his way to be the protector of Edwards sons before eventually declaring them illegitimate and taking the crown. Did he kill them ? Penn does not commit himself either way, but merely the notes the vanishing of the boys from view; their Mother, in sanctuary, mourns what she clearly believes is her bereavement of her sons ; state documents refer to the vanished Edward V in carefully ambiguous terms that can denote deposition or decease; one of their alleged murderers is given a royal pension for unique and confidential
Services. This is all circumstantial, but it’s telling that whereas most historians who want to exonerate Richard suggest an alternative outcome or perpetrator, Penn does neither.
.
Following the death of Richards son, his wife Anne sickens and dies. Rumour spread that Richard had bullied and neglected her to death so he could marry his fifteen year old niece in pursuit of a new heir; again we can’t know, but Penn thinks tuberculosis more likely.
Richard is ruthless in putting down rebellion, but this was hardly unusual. He seemed to want to rule well; if he did get rid of the princes , Penn suggests,
It’s a pragmatic move to avoid the issues caused by rival kings. He summoned his kingdom to piety in a move that may have been genuine or an attempt to purge a guilty conscience. And, as the skeleton proved, he had scoliosis ; the hunchback wasn’t a complete fake.
But amid the political turmoil the book takes time to tell us that this was the age of the beginning of printing and with it the slow growth of literacy and learning. The burgeoning Renaissance humanist movement, with it’s love of classical learning , new academic technique, and improved grasp of biblical languages would in turn inform the Reformation.
When I did this as a study of sources at GCSE the tacit assumption was that Richard was innocent. These days we’re not quite so sure.
It’s a solid and comprehensive survey; the disintegration of Henry VI’s rule , who may have been killed on the future Richard III’s orders, brought in the Yorkist Edward IV for a comparatively long but troubled reign . Edward was a shrewd politician but prone to howling blunders ; it’s arguable that by taking the Earldom of Richmond from Richard and giving it to Clarence , he fuelled Richards resentment. But the long game of balancing the twin Gallic kingdoms of France and Burgundy was played well. Edward was also, in stark contrast to Henry, a sex maniac and glutton. Illegitimate children don’t make for smooth dynastic successions.
Middle brother Clarence is a nastier and more treacherous sort than Shakespeare shows us ; contrary to Shakespeare , it’s Edward, not Richard, who has him killed, though Richard, already thirsty for power, was hardly sorry.
And so what of Richard the Third? It’s a mixed portrayal : he schemes his way to be the protector of Edwards sons before eventually declaring them illegitimate and taking the crown. Did he kill them ? Penn does not commit himself either way, but merely the notes the vanishing of the boys from view; their Mother, in sanctuary, mourns what she clearly believes is her bereavement of her sons ; state documents refer to the vanished Edward V in carefully ambiguous terms that can denote deposition or decease; one of their alleged murderers is given a royal pension for unique and confidential
Services. This is all circumstantial, but it’s telling that whereas most historians who want to exonerate Richard suggest an alternative outcome or perpetrator, Penn does neither.
.
Following the death of Richards son, his wife Anne sickens and dies. Rumour spread that Richard had bullied and neglected her to death so he could marry his fifteen year old niece in pursuit of a new heir; again we can’t know, but Penn thinks tuberculosis more likely.
Richard is ruthless in putting down rebellion, but this was hardly unusual. He seemed to want to rule well; if he did get rid of the princes , Penn suggests,
It’s a pragmatic move to avoid the issues caused by rival kings. He summoned his kingdom to piety in a move that may have been genuine or an attempt to purge a guilty conscience. And, as the skeleton proved, he had scoliosis ; the hunchback wasn’t a complete fake.
But amid the political turmoil the book takes time to tell us that this was the age of the beginning of printing and with it the slow growth of literacy and learning. The burgeoning Renaissance humanist movement, with it’s love of classical learning , new academic technique, and improved grasp of biblical languages would in turn inform the Reformation.
When I did this as a study of sources at GCSE the tacit assumption was that Richard was innocent. These days we’re not quite so sure.
March 3, 2020
For most of my life, including at school, I only studied modern history, so in latter years, I’ve tried to catch with the 15th and 16th centuries in particular. I don’t know if there is really anything new in this very in depth study of the War of the Roses and, especially, the three brothers York but I found it entertaining and informative. However, it’s something of a challenge to keep up with the sheer number of characters and their constantly shifting allegiances as well as the blitz of different treaties between England, France and Burgundy. Suffice it to say that, if you were an English nobleman in late 15th century England, your chances of ending up hung and eviscerated were high.
October 18, 2019
The saying goes something like "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family". There seems to have been little to choose between them in this sweeping history of the three York brothers: Edward IV, George (Duke of Clarence), and Richard III. Brother against brother, friend against friend - loyalty was ever-changing, depending upon which way the political wind was blowing and this well-researched book shows just how insecure the reign of any monarch was in the fifteenth century.
It's not a read for the fainthearted. It's quite a weighty tome at over 600 pages and it is packed with historical detail. There were also one or two icky bits - especially the death of one of the Burgundian horses which I found difficult to read and it made me dislike Anthony Woodville rather a lot. The majority of the book deals with Edward's reign and as a consequence I didn't feel as if I got to know as much about George or Richard, and the 'princes in the tower' were also rather shadowy figures. Overall though, it is a very well written, informative read especially if you aren't familiar with this era of English history.
Thanks to NetGalley and publishers, Penguin Books UK / Allen Lane, for the opportunity to read an ARC.
It's not a read for the fainthearted. It's quite a weighty tome at over 600 pages and it is packed with historical detail. There were also one or two icky bits - especially the death of one of the Burgundian horses which I found difficult to read and it made me dislike Anthony Woodville rather a lot. The majority of the book deals with Edward's reign and as a consequence I didn't feel as if I got to know as much about George or Richard, and the 'princes in the tower' were also rather shadowy figures. Overall though, it is a very well written, informative read especially if you aren't familiar with this era of English history.
Thanks to NetGalley and publishers, Penguin Books UK / Allen Lane, for the opportunity to read an ARC.
February 5, 2022
An enjoyable and readable summary of Yorkist England, beginning in the death throes of the Wars of the Roses and ending with the Tudor victory at Bosworth.
While a strong narrative of the period, the author set out his intention to refocus the story on the three sons of Richard, Duke of York: Edward IV, George of Clarence and Richard III. There was some focus on the relationship between the three brothers and how this influenced the body politic but I didn’t feel it was focused on enough to warrant this book being presented as offering new insights.
Rather, I felt the book would be better represented as a history of Yorkist England, with a focus on the three key players, rather than being solely focused on their relationship, which oft goes unmentioned for pages and pages at a time.
Only other thing to say is that this book, in my opinion - particularly early on - falls victim to Ricardian revisionism by seeking to present Richard as a loyal soldier who simply ‘lost his way’, oh, and ordered the deaths of his nephews and then tried to marry his niece.
While a strong narrative of the period, the author set out his intention to refocus the story on the three sons of Richard, Duke of York: Edward IV, George of Clarence and Richard III. There was some focus on the relationship between the three brothers and how this influenced the body politic but I didn’t feel it was focused on enough to warrant this book being presented as offering new insights.
Rather, I felt the book would be better represented as a history of Yorkist England, with a focus on the three key players, rather than being solely focused on their relationship, which oft goes unmentioned for pages and pages at a time.
Only other thing to say is that this book, in my opinion - particularly early on - falls victim to Ricardian revisionism by seeking to present Richard as a loyal soldier who simply ‘lost his way’, oh, and ordered the deaths of his nephews and then tried to marry his niece.
June 30, 2026
Jan.23, 2020: Put aside, only because the Library wants it back!! -- and there are 15 other readers waiting for their chance. I've made it to the 1471 restoration of Edward IV, and death of Henry VI, and I've put my name back at the bottom of the queue ... But observations, so far ...
Fascinating, beautifully written and very, very canny: Penn's strategy of doing a triple-biography of the three York brothers -- King Edward IV, George, Duke of Clarence, and Richard, Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III) -- as a way to take on the chaos of the final decades of the War of Roses, really pays off. What I particularly liked -- besides the attention to detail, and his knack for making complicated situations clear and easy to follow -- is Penn's subtlety in relating the events of the late 15th century to current events: the father of the threesome, Richard Duke of York, pitched his efforts to de-throne the Lancastrian King Henry VI, and replace him with his own dynasty, as a populist crusade, aimed at -- dare I say it? -- "draining the swamp" that London royalty and Westminster politics had become. When Richard is killed in an ambush by Lancastrians, and his son Edward steps up to the plate and drives Henry out, Penn describes him as promising "that he would 'save England' and lead it into a bright new future ..." Or should we say, make England great again ...?
The prosperity of Edward's kingdom also depended on a complicated network of alliances with European bankers, traders and governments, which some saw as "working only to the advantage of foreigners ..." -- with protectionist measures being introduced and withdrawn, like an economic yo-yo, to redress the balance. When Edward's fragile network of political enablers collapsed, mid-way through his reign, "[t]he rebel army that confronted London's defenders looked ominously familiar: an assortment of Kentish smallholders, labourers and tradesmen nursing much the same mixture of socio-economic grievances and desire for good government that had fuelled insurgents' violence over the past two decades and more."
Penn also makes a good case that the adversaries on both sides ran on a carefully curated diet of "fake news." When Edward's mother-in-law, Jacquetta of St Pol, is accused by the Lancastrians of engineering her daughter's marriage to the King by witchcraft, "[i]t hardly mattered that the allegations themselves didn't stand up. ... the truth of the matter was irrelevant: it was the story that counted." It all sounds painfully familiar ...
Oh, and there's this: Describing the Duke of Clarence, Edward younger brother (who never got over his pique at his demotion from Heir Presumptive, once Edward started producing babies with the lovely Elizabeth Woodville): "... if opportunities for self-aggrandizement presented themselves - active intervention on behalf of those interests was sometimes a necessity: intervention that carried with it the latent threat of litigation and violence. Clarence, with his neuralgic sensitivity to any perceived slight to his exalted status and rank, was alert to such challenges." I think Penn had a lot of fun writing lines like that. Butt of malmsey wine, anyone?
One modest little pop culture observation: anyone who doubts that George R.R. Martin really did his homework should come away from this with a bit more respect. The reality was, if anything, more bloody, more perverse, more twisted and amoral than almost anything Game of Thrones could throw at us ... The only thing missing were the dragons. And if Warwick the Kingmaker had been able to get his hands on a couple of them, who knows what would have happened ... ?
3 July, 2020: Finished, thanks to friend who loaned me his copy during Lockdown!
And my general opinion hasn't change a bit: detailed, well-written, fascinating. Treating this as a biography of the three brothers, King Edward IV, the duke of Clarence and King Richard III really pays off, providing interesting insights into how the tragedy of the final days of the House of York might have been down to the horrors of growing to young manhood in a family in which everything was up for grabs, and could be sacrificed for the glorious objective of that Hollow Crown.
As a longtime supporter of Richard, deep in denial that he could possible have been that bad, this has been a sad eye-opener, and I'm scrounging around, looking for current biographies of Richard that might redress the balance a little, and restore me to that happy state of believing that he was more sinned against than sinning ... But Penn's detail and careful timeline of his ouster of his brother's son and heir, built on the solid foundation of all that had gone before, is very convincing. It's not that Penn indulges in wild-eyed "Richard III is the devil" polemic, more that what he describes Richard doing is just business as usual for the House of York at that time, following in the footsteps of two brothers who managed to turn their success into personal and dynastic disaster.
As if, in following a misguided, toxic competition that existed among the three brothers out to its ultimate conclusions, "...he triggered the sequence of events that, as one appalled supported of Edward IV put it, would lead to to the 'extreme detriment' of the kingdom and 'utter subversion of his own house': the destruction of the house of York."
Fascinating, beautifully written and very, very canny: Penn's strategy of doing a triple-biography of the three York brothers -- King Edward IV, George, Duke of Clarence, and Richard, Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III) -- as a way to take on the chaos of the final decades of the War of Roses, really pays off. What I particularly liked -- besides the attention to detail, and his knack for making complicated situations clear and easy to follow -- is Penn's subtlety in relating the events of the late 15th century to current events: the father of the threesome, Richard Duke of York, pitched his efforts to de-throne the Lancastrian King Henry VI, and replace him with his own dynasty, as a populist crusade, aimed at -- dare I say it? -- "draining the swamp" that London royalty and Westminster politics had become. When Richard is killed in an ambush by Lancastrians, and his son Edward steps up to the plate and drives Henry out, Penn describes him as promising "that he would 'save England' and lead it into a bright new future ..." Or should we say, make England great again ...?
The prosperity of Edward's kingdom also depended on a complicated network of alliances with European bankers, traders and governments, which some saw as "working only to the advantage of foreigners ..." -- with protectionist measures being introduced and withdrawn, like an economic yo-yo, to redress the balance. When Edward's fragile network of political enablers collapsed, mid-way through his reign, "[t]he rebel army that confronted London's defenders looked ominously familiar: an assortment of Kentish smallholders, labourers and tradesmen nursing much the same mixture of socio-economic grievances and desire for good government that had fuelled insurgents' violence over the past two decades and more."
Penn also makes a good case that the adversaries on both sides ran on a carefully curated diet of "fake news." When Edward's mother-in-law, Jacquetta of St Pol, is accused by the Lancastrians of engineering her daughter's marriage to the King by witchcraft, "[i]t hardly mattered that the allegations themselves didn't stand up. ... the truth of the matter was irrelevant: it was the story that counted." It all sounds painfully familiar ...
Oh, and there's this: Describing the Duke of Clarence, Edward younger brother (who never got over his pique at his demotion from Heir Presumptive, once Edward started producing babies with the lovely Elizabeth Woodville): "... if opportunities for self-aggrandizement presented themselves - active intervention on behalf of those interests was sometimes a necessity: intervention that carried with it the latent threat of litigation and violence. Clarence, with his neuralgic sensitivity to any perceived slight to his exalted status and rank, was alert to such challenges." I think Penn had a lot of fun writing lines like that. Butt of malmsey wine, anyone?
One modest little pop culture observation: anyone who doubts that George R.R. Martin really did his homework should come away from this with a bit more respect. The reality was, if anything, more bloody, more perverse, more twisted and amoral than almost anything Game of Thrones could throw at us ... The only thing missing were the dragons. And if Warwick the Kingmaker had been able to get his hands on a couple of them, who knows what would have happened ... ?
3 July, 2020: Finished, thanks to friend who loaned me his copy during Lockdown!
And my general opinion hasn't change a bit: detailed, well-written, fascinating. Treating this as a biography of the three brothers, King Edward IV, the duke of Clarence and King Richard III really pays off, providing interesting insights into how the tragedy of the final days of the House of York might have been down to the horrors of growing to young manhood in a family in which everything was up for grabs, and could be sacrificed for the glorious objective of that Hollow Crown.
As a longtime supporter of Richard, deep in denial that he could possible have been that bad, this has been a sad eye-opener, and I'm scrounging around, looking for current biographies of Richard that might redress the balance a little, and restore me to that happy state of believing that he was more sinned against than sinning ... But Penn's detail and careful timeline of his ouster of his brother's son and heir, built on the solid foundation of all that had gone before, is very convincing. It's not that Penn indulges in wild-eyed "Richard III is the devil" polemic, more that what he describes Richard doing is just business as usual for the House of York at that time, following in the footsteps of two brothers who managed to turn their success into personal and dynastic disaster.
As if, in following a misguided, toxic competition that existed among the three brothers out to its ultimate conclusions, "...he triggered the sequence of events that, as one appalled supported of Edward IV put it, would lead to to the 'extreme detriment' of the kingdom and 'utter subversion of his own house': the destruction of the house of York."
February 16, 2026
In all the coverage of the Wars of the Roses, there has actually been little to focus on the York brothers and their personal relationships...but that is finally remedied with this volume. It occasionally falls into the pit of minutiae, but the overall result is a fantastic personal look at the Yorkist royals...and a confirmation of the fact that George, Duke of Clarence was a man who was wallpaper next to both the heroic Edward and the Machiavellian Richard.
April 5, 2025
Wonderfully written and incredibly detailed. 4-stars reflects my level of interest really, rather than the quality of the book. I particularly enjoyed the portraits created of the three brothers and the struggle after the death of Edward IV for the throne.
July 25, 2020
Pop Sugar Reading Challenge-a book published in 2020.
Pretty interesting, but I found myself checking out a few times.
Pretty interesting, but I found myself checking out a few times.
December 17, 2019
Thomas Penn's latest tome 'The Brothers York: An English Tragedy" is a pretty impressive work of historical biography, very well written, constructed and researched. It tells the story of the rise and fall of the York dynasty through the lives, and political careers, of perhaps the most famous trio of brothers in English history - Edward IV, George Duke of Clarence and Richard III.
We begin in 1461 with 17 year old Edward and he, in fact, dominates the book. There is all of the well-worn stuff on him: tall, handsome, charismatic, brave, promiscuous and, later in life, completely debauched and gluttonous. But Thomas Penn also highlights a number of Edward's bad characteristics, namely his cruelty and rapacity, which is not often the case with any assessment of Edward IV. He is normally written up as the dazzling 'sunne in splendour' who saved England from the feeble Henry VI, made a rash marriage and got fat in later life but here we see a much fuller picture of Edward and, in many respects, it's not a pretty one. It is also impossible not to see much of Edward's bad points reproduced later in his Tudor grandson, Henry VIII.
The middle part of the book deals largely with the always elusive figure of George, Duke of Clarence, and sadly, despite a good effort from Penn, he remains elusive. My own view is that Clarence was a bit of a spoilt child who wasn't content to play second fiddle but was too arrogant and impulsive to be a good plotter and always chose the wrong side anyway. We then come to Edward IV's untimely death, Richard III's grab for power and the unexplained fate of the Princes in the Tower. Penn glosses over some of this and I wish he had spent a bit more time on the mystery of the princes and whether Richard, the 'wicked uncle' of legend, had them killed or not. But, by this stage of the book, Henry Tudor is on the scene and Thomas Penn is clearly beguiled by him once more. We leave Richard dead on the field at Bosworth and Henry, surely the most unlikely final victor the Wars of the Roses could ever have produced, in the ascendant and about to marry Elizabeth of York, Edward's daughter, so in some ways the wheel had finally come full circle.
Overall, I really loved this book, even though it does have some problems and goes off on a few tangents now and then. The author has done an excellent job at conveying just how ruinous the wars were, the remorseless destruction of the Lancastrian families in particular was hard to read at times, and how the savagery the conflict unleashed ate away at the fabric of noble society until virtually nothing of the old, accepted codes of behaviour remained. Ultimately though the book is about the York brothers and how, despite having won several battles, they could never end the war between the three of them, with fatal consequences for their dynasty. Five stars.
We begin in 1461 with 17 year old Edward and he, in fact, dominates the book. There is all of the well-worn stuff on him: tall, handsome, charismatic, brave, promiscuous and, later in life, completely debauched and gluttonous. But Thomas Penn also highlights a number of Edward's bad characteristics, namely his cruelty and rapacity, which is not often the case with any assessment of Edward IV. He is normally written up as the dazzling 'sunne in splendour' who saved England from the feeble Henry VI, made a rash marriage and got fat in later life but here we see a much fuller picture of Edward and, in many respects, it's not a pretty one. It is also impossible not to see much of Edward's bad points reproduced later in his Tudor grandson, Henry VIII.
The middle part of the book deals largely with the always elusive figure of George, Duke of Clarence, and sadly, despite a good effort from Penn, he remains elusive. My own view is that Clarence was a bit of a spoilt child who wasn't content to play second fiddle but was too arrogant and impulsive to be a good plotter and always chose the wrong side anyway. We then come to Edward IV's untimely death, Richard III's grab for power and the unexplained fate of the Princes in the Tower. Penn glosses over some of this and I wish he had spent a bit more time on the mystery of the princes and whether Richard, the 'wicked uncle' of legend, had them killed or not. But, by this stage of the book, Henry Tudor is on the scene and Thomas Penn is clearly beguiled by him once more. We leave Richard dead on the field at Bosworth and Henry, surely the most unlikely final victor the Wars of the Roses could ever have produced, in the ascendant and about to marry Elizabeth of York, Edward's daughter, so in some ways the wheel had finally come full circle.
Overall, I really loved this book, even though it does have some problems and goes off on a few tangents now and then. The author has done an excellent job at conveying just how ruinous the wars were, the remorseless destruction of the Lancastrian families in particular was hard to read at times, and how the savagery the conflict unleashed ate away at the fabric of noble society until virtually nothing of the old, accepted codes of behaviour remained. Ultimately though the book is about the York brothers and how, despite having won several battles, they could never end the war between the three of them, with fatal consequences for their dynasty. Five stars.
September 13, 2020
There’s a lot of information to digest in this book. Some I’d read about before, some not. I only wish I could be more sure of the new information, except there are three problems. One, a lot of what Penn claims has no footnotes, and many that do aren’t from original sources but from previous books written on the subject.
Two, the author’s bias is blatant.
Richard of York “believes his own rhetoric, convincing himself” of his destiny as a reforming hero. And how does the author know what Richard of York does or does not think? Yet he treats these unknowable thoughts as fact.
Penn condemns Richard III for purchasing an “inexhaustible supply of alcohol.” But Richard wouldn’t have been the only one drinking it.
People, such as Charles of Burgundy, who fights on the Lancastian side, do so, not out of any gain, but out of a “deep sense of affinity of shared Lancastrian blood.” Or, like Somerset, who had “rediscovered his Lancastrian loyalties.” If for Lancaster, it’s for a noble cause, if for York, it’s always for money and power.
Elizabeth Woodville wasn’t being a spendthrift, she was maintaining “the magnificence that her royal rank demanded.”
Richard “concealed his physical condition, except when it suited him.” Suited him? When would it suit him? Physical deformity was seen as a manifestation of an inner evil.
Richard presents his “shriveled” arm as proof of Elizabeth of Woodville’s witchcraft. But Penn changes the story so that is Richard holding both arms straight in front of him, one being shorter than the other because of his scoliosis. But the study of Richard’s remains show proof positive that there was nothing wrong with either arm. They were the same length.
The third problem is that he was dead wrong on some things.
“Loyalte Me Lie” wasn’t Richard’s “new royal motto.” He took it while still Duke of Gloucester.
We don’t know if Richard’s son was “in delicate health.” It’s often been supposed, but there’s no proof either way.
Henry Tudor wasn’t a descendant of Henry VI.
We don’t know what happened to Francis Lovell. He may have “spent the rest of his days in the obscurity of a Scottish exile.” But that’s just conjecture.
George, Duke of Clarence’s son, Edward, was not a “harmless, backward child” when Tudor “did what he had to do.” (!) He was twenty-four. And there is no proof that he was backward.
There’s probably more but I think I’ve made my case. All in all, the book is an interesting, though flawed narrative.
Two, the author’s bias is blatant.
Richard of York “believes his own rhetoric, convincing himself” of his destiny as a reforming hero. And how does the author know what Richard of York does or does not think? Yet he treats these unknowable thoughts as fact.
Penn condemns Richard III for purchasing an “inexhaustible supply of alcohol.” But Richard wouldn’t have been the only one drinking it.
People, such as Charles of Burgundy, who fights on the Lancastian side, do so, not out of any gain, but out of a “deep sense of affinity of shared Lancastrian blood.” Or, like Somerset, who had “rediscovered his Lancastrian loyalties.” If for Lancaster, it’s for a noble cause, if for York, it’s always for money and power.
Elizabeth Woodville wasn’t being a spendthrift, she was maintaining “the magnificence that her royal rank demanded.”
Richard “concealed his physical condition, except when it suited him.” Suited him? When would it suit him? Physical deformity was seen as a manifestation of an inner evil.
Richard presents his “shriveled” arm as proof of Elizabeth of Woodville’s witchcraft. But Penn changes the story so that is Richard holding both arms straight in front of him, one being shorter than the other because of his scoliosis. But the study of Richard’s remains show proof positive that there was nothing wrong with either arm. They were the same length.
The third problem is that he was dead wrong on some things.
“Loyalte Me Lie” wasn’t Richard’s “new royal motto.” He took it while still Duke of Gloucester.
We don’t know if Richard’s son was “in delicate health.” It’s often been supposed, but there’s no proof either way.
Henry Tudor wasn’t a descendant of Henry VI.
We don’t know what happened to Francis Lovell. He may have “spent the rest of his days in the obscurity of a Scottish exile.” But that’s just conjecture.
George, Duke of Clarence’s son, Edward, was not a “harmless, backward child” when Tudor “did what he had to do.” (!) He was twenty-four. And there is no proof that he was backward.
There’s probably more but I think I’ve made my case. All in all, the book is an interesting, though flawed narrative.
November 10, 2020
Sometimes history is better than fiction. In this book, Thomas Penn recounts the tale of the Wars of the Roses - how the House of York shoved the feeble Lancastrian king Henry VI aside and rose to power. The story of Edward IV and his brothers Clarence and Gloucester (the later Richard III) has been told many times, but never like here. Larded with fragments from contemporary correspondence and archival sources, we get a more balanced picture of the Yorkist rulers than painted by 15th and 16th century chroniclers - who had new rulers to please and portrayed Edward and especially Richard as immoral gluttons for power. Instead, we now learn of their doubts and their fears, which were often inspired by religion and benevolence.
Most of all, this book lays bare the dynamics of power, as I imagine they still work today. The rule of any king is based on enormous amounts of debt, and the willingness of creditors to support their ambitions. Apart from funds, sheer luck and circumstance are often underestimated factors. Weather conditions on a battlefield, reinforcements arriving at just the right ime, the unwillingness of a people to fight a war because all hands are needed to bring in the harvest, etc.: they can determine the outcome of a war, regardless of the size of the opposing armies or the fervour of political speeches.
Kings are mere mortals, but as power corrupts them they tend to forget. Great intentions break on lack of funds, and unethical means are necessary to fill the coffers. Because of past offenses and allegiances, the struggle to power is more often than not a struggle to survive. The House of York, for all its ambition and talent, fell because of its unsatiable hunger for ever more. Reading this book provides you with a highly entertaining read, while also giving you valuable insights on the dynamics of power and debt. A magnificent work.
Most of all, this book lays bare the dynamics of power, as I imagine they still work today. The rule of any king is based on enormous amounts of debt, and the willingness of creditors to support their ambitions. Apart from funds, sheer luck and circumstance are often underestimated factors. Weather conditions on a battlefield, reinforcements arriving at just the right ime, the unwillingness of a people to fight a war because all hands are needed to bring in the harvest, etc.: they can determine the outcome of a war, regardless of the size of the opposing armies or the fervour of political speeches.
Kings are mere mortals, but as power corrupts them they tend to forget. Great intentions break on lack of funds, and unethical means are necessary to fill the coffers. Because of past offenses and allegiances, the struggle to power is more often than not a struggle to survive. The House of York, for all its ambition and talent, fell because of its unsatiable hunger for ever more. Reading this book provides you with a highly entertaining read, while also giving you valuable insights on the dynamics of power and debt. A magnificent work.
March 14, 2021
You'll never run short of books about the Wars of the Roses, but this is a pretty lively tale, even when they are talking about a limp afterthought of a performance.
The genealogy of the sons of Edward III (and the hangers on) can be pretty tough to map out in writing, so for the most part Penn leaves it to you to look at the tree at the front, helped perhaps that he's focused on the York part of it. That being said, the breezy style works well throughout, whether about the shipping East of buillion causing currency shortages, acts of resumption, trade treaties and a...
quarrel by which of the lords got to sleep with the innkeeper's daughter, became a full blown row...
...and yes, the clash of the political and the personal gets full reign. The interplay of Earl of Warwick with France and Burgundy (the quasi-independent duchy with rulers such as "the Fearless", "the Good" and "the Bold") gives life to a side character, where his personal aims influenced international diplomacy. The extra bit of spice is a diplomatic incident threatening to unfold when a Woodville rams his sword down a horse's throat.
Edward IV, the only one of the three to die in his bed, gets the treatment his flawed character demands for, there being something brittle at the heart of Edward's sense of himself and his kingship. Richard III never really gets a good run of things, even during his dukedom, and Clarence remains a wastrel. None of this is really revelationary, so this repackaging of a well covered story relies on the writing style. Since I'm now intrigued by the Papal monopoly on alum, I think Penn got there.
The genealogy of the sons of Edward III (and the hangers on) can be pretty tough to map out in writing, so for the most part Penn leaves it to you to look at the tree at the front, helped perhaps that he's focused on the York part of it. That being said, the breezy style works well throughout, whether about the shipping East of buillion causing currency shortages, acts of resumption, trade treaties and a...
quarrel by which of the lords got to sleep with the innkeeper's daughter, became a full blown row...
...and yes, the clash of the political and the personal gets full reign. The interplay of Earl of Warwick with France and Burgundy (the quasi-independent duchy with rulers such as "the Fearless", "the Good" and "the Bold") gives life to a side character, where his personal aims influenced international diplomacy. The extra bit of spice is a diplomatic incident threatening to unfold when a Woodville rams his sword down a horse's throat.
Edward IV, the only one of the three to die in his bed, gets the treatment his flawed character demands for, there being something brittle at the heart of Edward's sense of himself and his kingship. Richard III never really gets a good run of things, even during his dukedom, and Clarence remains a wastrel. None of this is really revelationary, so this repackaging of a well covered story relies on the writing style. Since I'm now intrigued by the Papal monopoly on alum, I think Penn got there.
April 8, 2025
Okay, I was a card-carrying member of the Richard III Society, and one of my favorite authors is Sharon Kay Penman, who wore The Sunne in Splendor about the Yorks and Richard in particular. When I started reading The Brothers York, it took me quite a while to set aside what I thought to be true, and to see more clearly what a clusterf#ck the entire Yorkist period was.
Penn covers all the bases here, up to and including the reign of Richard III. The once gorgeous 18-year-old King with the beautiful face and 6' 4" frame has succumbed to 20 years of gluttony, sexual adventures, and taxing the people endlessly to go to war to France while never quite getting to the battle part of it. Edward was like the original Brexiteer, believing that England holds all the cards, and that the rest of the world would beat a path to his door.
I could have done without the endless accounting of just how much money Edward IV got through hook or crook for all his various adventures, especially since it is in pounds, with no translation to current value. But overall, this is a thorough look at the brothers York- Edward IV, George Duke of Clarence, and Richard III. 4 stars.
Penn covers all the bases here, up to and including the reign of Richard III. The once gorgeous 18-year-old King with the beautiful face and 6' 4" frame has succumbed to 20 years of gluttony, sexual adventures, and taxing the people endlessly to go to war to France while never quite getting to the battle part of it. Edward was like the original Brexiteer, believing that England holds all the cards, and that the rest of the world would beat a path to his door.
I could have done without the endless accounting of just how much money Edward IV got through hook or crook for all his various adventures, especially since it is in pounds, with no translation to current value. But overall, this is a thorough look at the brothers York- Edward IV, George Duke of Clarence, and Richard III. 4 stars.
October 2, 2019
I'm something of a Richard III fangirl so devour anything Wars of the Roses-related with great fervour, so I was delighted at the prospect of The Brothers York. And it doesn't disappoint - you may think that with such fertile source material, how could it? But so many authors - fiction and nonfiction alike - don't do the topic justice. Thomas Penn, however, does.
Accessible but always erudite, The Brothers York focuses on the power struggle and relationship between the eponymous York brothers. This is a fresh approach to the tale - a tale which has been told so many times and in so many ways it's quite a feat to do it at all differently, and with success. It's meticulously researched and engagingly written - never dry, this lovely retelling fair bounds along. And I'm happy to say that Richard isn't singled out for either his dastardly evil nature or his misunderstood hero status - both of which are just as tedious! Penn presents a balanced, unbiased history, which also makes for a nice change.
This is great as a first stop if you want to learn more about this fascinating period of British history, but just as rewarding if you're a bit of a buff already. I loved it.
My thanks to the publisher and Netgalley for the ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Accessible but always erudite, The Brothers York focuses on the power struggle and relationship between the eponymous York brothers. This is a fresh approach to the tale - a tale which has been told so many times and in so many ways it's quite a feat to do it at all differently, and with success. It's meticulously researched and engagingly written - never dry, this lovely retelling fair bounds along. And I'm happy to say that Richard isn't singled out for either his dastardly evil nature or his misunderstood hero status - both of which are just as tedious! Penn presents a balanced, unbiased history, which also makes for a nice change.
This is great as a first stop if you want to learn more about this fascinating period of British history, but just as rewarding if you're a bit of a buff already. I loved it.
My thanks to the publisher and Netgalley for the ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 204 reviews