What do you think?
Rate this book
Bloodfeud: Murder and Revenge in Anglo-Saxon England
A treacherous murder in northern England on an early spring day in 1016 is used to introduce readers to the world of the aristocratic men and women of Anglo-Saxon England, their violence, their piety, their assumptions and experiences, their hopes and fears. In this book, award-winning author Richard Fletcher illuminates English society and politics in the years around the Norman Conquest, threading together scanty documentary evidence to produce a rich narrative.
264 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
10 people are currently reading
551 people want to read
About the author
Richard Fletcher
55 books31 followersRichard Alexander Fletcher was a historian who specialized in the medieval period. He was Professor of History at the University of York and one of the outstanding talents in English and Spanish medieval scholarship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
Read
October 17, 2018Although this is a study of a bloodfeud between two Northern English families that extends over the period of the Norman conquest of england, I'd recommend it as an introduction to late Anglo-Saxon England, or even to the family politics of early medieval Europe.
Because of the paucity of the source material Fletcher has to explore the social and political context thoroughly, but at the same time the rivalry of the two families, with outbreaks of extreme violence, acts as a ribbon of plot that runs through the book. The nature of the evidence is sketchy enough that tender hearted readers need not fear being confronted by graphic scenes of violence, instead Fletcher has to infer the extent of the power struggle between the two noble families.
For readers familiar with Anglo-Saxon England there is a lot to value in seeing that world from a Northern English perspective when the outlook of the West Saxons tends to be the default for this period of English history.
Because of the paucity of the source material Fletcher has to explore the social and political context thoroughly, but at the same time the rivalry of the two families, with outbreaks of extreme violence, acts as a ribbon of plot that runs through the book. The nature of the evidence is sketchy enough that tender hearted readers need not fear being confronted by graphic scenes of violence, instead Fletcher has to infer the extent of the power struggle between the two noble families.
For readers familiar with Anglo-Saxon England there is a lot to value in seeing that world from a Northern English perspective when the outlook of the West Saxons tends to be the default for this period of English history.
August 7, 2014
Bloodfeud is one of those reference books that you would want to read after you have a decent working knowledge of the period's history; otherwise many of the subtleties may be lost on you. If you are looking for those fine details that help to connect the dots - so to speak - this is an amazing source. Richard Fletcher, professor emeritus at the University of York, gives us a thorough exploration of the customs, habits, and motivations of this shadowy culture which the moderns of European descent don't easily relate to. For instance, "Regrettable though this might have been to high-minded churchmen, it was a fact of life that violence and conflict were as much a part of the social order as was peace." And, "Peace was not the natural order of society in the age of Uhtred and Thurbrand. It was a social condition that had to be brought about..." We are talking about 11th century Northumbria, and these specific individuals started a feud at the beginning of King Canute's reign that lasted on and off for over 60 years.
As he explains it, the Bloodfeud was considered honorable - even obligatory - for generations if need be. There were certain conventions that were recognized: "Anglo-Saxon Kings did not seek to abolish feuding; that would have been almost inconceivable. Guided by their churchmen they lamented indiscriminate violence, but they accepted the sanctioned, legitimate violence involved in feuding, seeking only to enforce a proper observance of customs designed to limit its spread." Negotiators were impartial and respected parties, from friends, elders, churchmen, even kings. Sometimes a negotiated settlement worked; but it was not uncommon for a feud to resurface years or even decades later, sparked by an incautious taunt or a more villainous purpose.
This book is about much more than just feuds. We see a close-up of the Anglo-Saxon culture, as well as life under different kings and earls. We see what led to turmoil between families, and we catch a whiff of contemporary viewpoints. Fletcher freely admits that much of our knowledge of this distant era has been pieced together from random bits of information: a gift of an estate to the church, a deed, a chance remark from an anonymous chronicler. But some of these tidbits speak volumes and he helps tie them together with important events.
We also get a closer look at certain individuals such as Tostig Godwineson, who is not the necessarily the black-and-white villain often depicted. It's possible that his unpopularity was due as much to his outsider status as his imposition of burdensome taxes. There is evidence that Earl Morcar secretly plotted with the Northumbrian chiefs for the overthrow of this son of Godwine, the enemy of his house. Interestingly, Fletcher makes a point that I never thought about. He suggests that since Morcar failed to defend his earldom against Harald Hardraada, it is very possible that King Harold II relieved him of his office before going south to Hastings (and appointed sheriff Merleswein in his place). This could explain a few things!
This volume will most definitely keep its place on my bookshelf; I'll need to refer to it again and again. What I took away from this book was a more thorough understanding of a complex society that followed harsh rules imposed by a less forgiving culture.
As he explains it, the Bloodfeud was considered honorable - even obligatory - for generations if need be. There were certain conventions that were recognized: "Anglo-Saxon Kings did not seek to abolish feuding; that would have been almost inconceivable. Guided by their churchmen they lamented indiscriminate violence, but they accepted the sanctioned, legitimate violence involved in feuding, seeking only to enforce a proper observance of customs designed to limit its spread." Negotiators were impartial and respected parties, from friends, elders, churchmen, even kings. Sometimes a negotiated settlement worked; but it was not uncommon for a feud to resurface years or even decades later, sparked by an incautious taunt or a more villainous purpose.
This book is about much more than just feuds. We see a close-up of the Anglo-Saxon culture, as well as life under different kings and earls. We see what led to turmoil between families, and we catch a whiff of contemporary viewpoints. Fletcher freely admits that much of our knowledge of this distant era has been pieced together from random bits of information: a gift of an estate to the church, a deed, a chance remark from an anonymous chronicler. But some of these tidbits speak volumes and he helps tie them together with important events.
We also get a closer look at certain individuals such as Tostig Godwineson, who is not the necessarily the black-and-white villain often depicted. It's possible that his unpopularity was due as much to his outsider status as his imposition of burdensome taxes. There is evidence that Earl Morcar secretly plotted with the Northumbrian chiefs for the overthrow of this son of Godwine, the enemy of his house. Interestingly, Fletcher makes a point that I never thought about. He suggests that since Morcar failed to defend his earldom against Harald Hardraada, it is very possible that King Harold II relieved him of his office before going south to Hastings (and appointed sheriff Merleswein in his place). This could explain a few things!
This volume will most definitely keep its place on my bookshelf; I'll need to refer to it again and again. What I took away from this book was a more thorough understanding of a complex society that followed harsh rules imposed by a less forgiving culture.
April 7, 2010
An interesting book, but not what I was expecting. The whole problem with the Dark Age era is the lack of primary sources on which historians can base their works. On reading the blurb of this, a book solely occupied with feuding families in 10th century Northumbria, I imagined that the book would open up new nuggets of information, leading us to new ways of understanding about the way of life in those times...
It sort of misses the mark, and that's because a large section of the book is padded. Over half isn't actually about 'blood feuds', but instead general historical background on the period. We learn about Anglo-Saxon politics, then more specifically the politics of the north. There's a lengthy section detailing the reservoirs of power that existed during the period, as well as various battles between the kingdoms of Bernicia and Deira against the marauding Scots. The last couple of chapters give us another re-run of the Norman Conquest.
It's all fine by itself, but in the course of studying the period, I was already very familiar with all this. I wanted new theories and new ground. Admittedly, there is some, in the mid section of the book, but again the facts are very sketchy. Fletcher does a good job of linking it all together and providing focused suppositions based on his scanty information, but it's thin on the ground.
In reality, this details a strung-out series of murders between heavy dollops of the background of Anglo-Saxon society. The writing style is fairly easy to cope with and the book doesn't outstay its welcome, it's just not what I was expecting.
It sort of misses the mark, and that's because a large section of the book is padded. Over half isn't actually about 'blood feuds', but instead general historical background on the period. We learn about Anglo-Saxon politics, then more specifically the politics of the north. There's a lengthy section detailing the reservoirs of power that existed during the period, as well as various battles between the kingdoms of Bernicia and Deira against the marauding Scots. The last couple of chapters give us another re-run of the Norman Conquest.
It's all fine by itself, but in the course of studying the period, I was already very familiar with all this. I wanted new theories and new ground. Admittedly, there is some, in the mid section of the book, but again the facts are very sketchy. Fletcher does a good job of linking it all together and providing focused suppositions based on his scanty information, but it's thin on the ground.
In reality, this details a strung-out series of murders between heavy dollops of the background of Anglo-Saxon society. The writing style is fairly easy to cope with and the book doesn't outstay its welcome, it's just not what I was expecting.
November 23, 2008
The murder of Uhtred Earl of Northumberland serves as a fascinating jumping off point to give a vivid account of life in late Anglo-Saxon England. Documentary sources are very thin, and if you want a work of history that is full of dates and facts, this is not it. This can be frustrating at times, because just as I got deeply engaged in the personal story of one of the characters, he or she would disappear off the record. So the strength of this book is in the skillful way in which the author moves from the particular to the general to describe society and politics in this transitional age, just before the Conquest.
It's a great, lively read!
It's a great, lively read!
March 8, 2015
Very entertaining story of a violent feud between two Northumbrian clans that spanned generations. It also doubles as a pretty concise history of the north of England, and Anglo Saxon England as a whole, in the 11th century. The culture of feuding, the laws built around it, the ways the Church got involved and how it impacted contemporary society as a whole are all covered, painting a picture of a more sophisticated society than is usually portrayed in pre Norman Conquest England, but also a society in which brutal violence was considered the norm, and peace, law and order was something that had to be strictly imposed from above. I liked it enough to check out what other works the author had written, and it was a real bummer to discover he died in 2005.
July 9, 2012
Fletcher's book is good on Anglo-Saxon England, and on the general historical background of the time, but I felt he kept drifting away from the supposed focus of the book. I was hoping for something that focused a little more clearly on the bloodfeud, rather than sticking to generalities I was already aware of.
It's easy to read, and interesting stuff, but not what I was hoping for.
It's easy to read, and interesting stuff, but not what I was hoping for.
February 20, 2009
This is not only the best popular book I've ever read about Anglo-Saxon England, it maybe be the best book written for non-specialists that I've ever read about any medieval topic. The names can be jaw-crackers and confusing if you're not used to them, but this gets better if you focus and it's worth it. Recommend this highly to interested students!
September 15, 2019
This is nominally a history of a feud between two noble families Northern England in the 11th century. In fact, we know hardly anything about that feud, and so mostly the book is a general history of northern England in the 10th through 12th centuries. This is a good topic, treated with a deft and playful hand. But there is a bit of false advertising here.
We only know about this feud because it was entangled with a long-running property dispute, and a church chronicle of the 12th century was interested in the property. We have some disputed Yorkshire manors and some notes that the manors passed from hand to hand as the previous owner was killed, but we are left with many questions about how much the property dispute motivated the killing and how much the killings scrambled the title.
The big thing I learned is that Saxon England doesn't conform to our usual mental model of a single axis from less to more government. Alfred and his successors were very strong monarchs; they were able to tax on a huge scale, able to raise armies and manage large construction projects. But they thought of ordinary homicide as not their concern; most killing was compounded with wergeld, and not treated as "criminal" in the way we understand it. There weren't trials and the government wouldn't try to pursue offenders. The real check on homicide was the risk of reprisal. Of course, this is a system that inevitably will lead to un-resolved grievances. When risk assessments change over time this can result in a feud being reactivated or "woken", and somebody will be killed for long-ago actions towards the perpetrator's ancestor.
Another major theme of the book is that Northumbria was a political anomaly -- a pocket of Saxon territory on the north side of the danelaw, mostly severed from the rest of Saxon England. And consequently the rulers of Northumbria acted as quasi-sovereigns and it was difficult for rulers in Wessex to impose their own people. Fletcher suggests, concededly without proof, that "local versus foreign" was one of the causes motivating the feud.
We only know about this feud because it was entangled with a long-running property dispute, and a church chronicle of the 12th century was interested in the property. We have some disputed Yorkshire manors and some notes that the manors passed from hand to hand as the previous owner was killed, but we are left with many questions about how much the property dispute motivated the killing and how much the killings scrambled the title.
The big thing I learned is that Saxon England doesn't conform to our usual mental model of a single axis from less to more government. Alfred and his successors were very strong monarchs; they were able to tax on a huge scale, able to raise armies and manage large construction projects. But they thought of ordinary homicide as not their concern; most killing was compounded with wergeld, and not treated as "criminal" in the way we understand it. There weren't trials and the government wouldn't try to pursue offenders. The real check on homicide was the risk of reprisal. Of course, this is a system that inevitably will lead to un-resolved grievances. When risk assessments change over time this can result in a feud being reactivated or "woken", and somebody will be killed for long-ago actions towards the perpetrator's ancestor.
Another major theme of the book is that Northumbria was a political anomaly -- a pocket of Saxon territory on the north side of the danelaw, mostly severed from the rest of Saxon England. And consequently the rulers of Northumbria acted as quasi-sovereigns and it was difficult for rulers in Wessex to impose their own people. Fletcher suggests, concededly without proof, that "local versus foreign" was one of the causes motivating the feud.
January 30, 2015
A rather deceptive book in that it appears to be one concerning a distinct specific period in Anglo-Saxon politics that analyses the nuances of the culture at the time but turns out to actually be a fairly staid, generic book on the Anglo-Saxons from early days to the Norman Conquest, with the bloodfeud relegated to the status of an afterthought.
A good introductory book for those who are completely new to the period but one which will actually only antagonise those already with any kind of familiarity with the events or main protagonists.
A good introductory book for those who are completely new to the period but one which will actually only antagonise those already with any kind of familiarity with the events or main protagonists.
April 15, 2009
Great for those of you who: a) love the dirty side of medieval england; b) like lots of historical details, and are able to hold multiple early english names in your head (I can't keep my Eodreds straight from my Eothoreds; c) can devote some concentrated time to this. I am almost there, but not quite. I read it some years ago, and picked it up again for a diversion from the semester. But it defeated me this second time. I want the movie with Clive Owen and the new terminator dude.
October 30, 2011
Read many years ago, but I remember enjoying it.
November 7, 2014
Interesting pop-scientific retelling of the conflicts between the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings under the reigns of Canute and Ethelred the Unread. Speed-read for my thesis.
December 16, 2022
An obscure murder in English history, that of Earl Uhtred of Northumbria, in 1016, by his rival Thurbrand, when he came to make submission to Canute is the leitmotif of this book. This led to a bloodfeud lasting three generations and which was only ended by the execution of the last in Uhtred's line being executed for treason by William the Conqueror.
The author became fascinated with the story due to the location of the murder possibly being the village in Yorkshire where he lived. It seems there is little historical information available on which this story can be built and the first part of the book is inevitably speculative. So much Anglo-Saxon history is lost in the mists of time.
What redeems the work and makes it a worthwhile read is the detailed account it provides of late Anglo-Saxon rule (with considerable Danish interludes) and what happened in the North in the early years under William. I knew little of the details of this time apart from the see-sawing of monarchy between Wessex and Denmark.
By the time we get to 1066 what is not surprising is that England is invaded. It happened routinely in the Eleventh Century. England was one of the richest countries in Europe and a prize for any adventurous warlord on the make. What was surprising was that it was not invaded again after the Normans arrived.
Also that rule by Wessex of the North was always tenuous. Northumbria had been its own kingdom for centuries. The Danes seemed to control Deira (Yorkshire) but Bernicia (Northumberland) stayed under semi-independent Anglo-Saxon rule up until the securing of the North after the Revolt of the Earls in 1075.
The author became fascinated with the story due to the location of the murder possibly being the village in Yorkshire where he lived. It seems there is little historical information available on which this story can be built and the first part of the book is inevitably speculative. So much Anglo-Saxon history is lost in the mists of time.
What redeems the work and makes it a worthwhile read is the detailed account it provides of late Anglo-Saxon rule (with considerable Danish interludes) and what happened in the North in the early years under William. I knew little of the details of this time apart from the see-sawing of monarchy between Wessex and Denmark.
By the time we get to 1066 what is not surprising is that England is invaded. It happened routinely in the Eleventh Century. England was one of the richest countries in Europe and a prize for any adventurous warlord on the make. What was surprising was that it was not invaded again after the Normans arrived.
Also that rule by Wessex of the North was always tenuous. Northumbria had been its own kingdom for centuries. The Danes seemed to control Deira (Yorkshire) but Bernicia (Northumberland) stayed under semi-independent Anglo-Saxon rule up until the securing of the North after the Revolt of the Earls in 1075.
March 11, 2020
Bloodfeud by Richard Fletcher, 2002 and 203 pages
This is a very good read and the story is far better than a lot of fiction or drama on the telly. In a nutshell, it's an account of a feud in Northumbria that spanned 5 generations. However, because what we know was recorded as a by the by in an account of how certain estates came to be owned by Durham Cathedral, this book isn't all about the feud. We simply don't have enough in the way of sources that mention it for it to be so.
Instead, Fletcher has had to turn detective, tracing people through charters, church records and so on, to show who may have been related to who, or in cahoots with whom. A lot of the parties involved have similar names and so this is even more tricky than it sounds and there are a few 'don't knows, but possibly'. In addition to this, there is a lot of context given as to how things were in
11th century Northumbria. Sometimes context can feel like padding, especially when our sources are thin, but in this instance it actually adds a lot to the work.
This is a thrilling tale and there is a lot to be learnt concerning the intricacies of late Anglo-Saxon Northumbrian politics. Fletcher really does bring out the feeling of just how lightly the king's writ ran in the North. It also makes you wonder just how many other such stories have been lost to history.
This is a very good read and the story is far better than a lot of fiction or drama on the telly. In a nutshell, it's an account of a feud in Northumbria that spanned 5 generations. However, because what we know was recorded as a by the by in an account of how certain estates came to be owned by Durham Cathedral, this book isn't all about the feud. We simply don't have enough in the way of sources that mention it for it to be so.
Instead, Fletcher has had to turn detective, tracing people through charters, church records and so on, to show who may have been related to who, or in cahoots with whom. A lot of the parties involved have similar names and so this is even more tricky than it sounds and there are a few 'don't knows, but possibly'. In addition to this, there is a lot of context given as to how things were in
11th century Northumbria. Sometimes context can feel like padding, especially when our sources are thin, but in this instance it actually adds a lot to the work.
This is a thrilling tale and there is a lot to be learnt concerning the intricacies of late Anglo-Saxon Northumbrian politics. Fletcher really does bring out the feeling of just how lightly the king's writ ran in the North. It also makes you wonder just how many other such stories have been lost to history.
May 18, 2020
I am grateful to Wendy for inspiring me to finish this after I had languished half-way for a while. Indeed the second half is much more interesting and abandons the pretence that it is primarily about a Blood Feud. More familiar historical figures start to appear, like Macbeth and Harald, and the account of the last stand of the Anglo-Saxon world in the North and the coming of the Normans is fascinating with new insights (for me) of how the invasion happened. It is perhaps because I am more familiar with these figures that I found it more enjoyable, as the stage expands. I have not seen The Last Kingdom, which apparently Bernard Cornwell used Blood Feud as an inspiration, but from the brief synopsis I have read of the plot, it seems that he has taken the plot back almost a hundred years. The reality is in fact more like Game of Thrones, with a world that pays lip service to concepts like safe conduct, preservation of hostages, and respect for sanctuary in churches, where it was not uncommon to burn the church and then kill those inside as they rushed out. Fletcher notes blithely that massacres at feasts were not uncommon and then lists the advantages of doing this, one of a number of humorous asides. Once I had got over the difficulty of disentangling the different provinces and personnel, this became very enjoyable
October 17, 2022
This book requires reading twice. The first time to get the framework of the thing and the names and the second time with a large piece of paper on which to chart the progression of the action and those involved. The author gave us short charts which give us the action at the moment he's documenting and perhaps trying to do a big one wouldn't clarify anything but it might reduce the flipping back and forth as you try to remember the bit before. He certainly tried to give us all the available detail and is clear when he is guessing.
When there isn't a police force or much short of an army to deal with law breakers and the law itself is sometimes difficult to define then the system of feuding is one way to cut down on violence, ironically enough. This feud, running over much of the 11th century is what defined England. The only bit that wasn't there was the alleged oath over relics that Harold gave William. Even if Fletcher thinks it didn't happen it would have been good to know why he thinks that.
It was great seeing where MacBeth and his lady fit into history and I notice that Shakespeare apparently didn't like her name of Gruoch and wasn't prepared to make up a fictitious one so she's just Lady Macbeth all through. She did have a son, too, Lulach. I'll have to read this again soon - with that large sheet of paper.
When there isn't a police force or much short of an army to deal with law breakers and the law itself is sometimes difficult to define then the system of feuding is one way to cut down on violence, ironically enough. This feud, running over much of the 11th century is what defined England. The only bit that wasn't there was the alleged oath over relics that Harold gave William. Even if Fletcher thinks it didn't happen it would have been good to know why he thinks that.
It was great seeing where MacBeth and his lady fit into history and I notice that Shakespeare apparently didn't like her name of Gruoch and wasn't prepared to make up a fictitious one so she's just Lady Macbeth all through. She did have a son, too, Lulach. I'll have to read this again soon - with that large sheet of paper.
September 24, 2018
I chose "really liked" over just "liked" because it takes me forever to get through any history, but I read this at a decent clip. Fletcher's prose is far from dry and boring, and his genuine interest in the period is evident (still not contagious enough to fully engage my interest, but let me repeat that I am NOT a history reader).
I do love Anglo-Saxon literature, though, and this book opened up the familiar texts of Beowulf, Battle of Maldon, and even the tale of Robin Hood (sheriff = shire reeve: "Ooooh") in surprising and interesting ways. I'm amazed at how much just one book's survey of history (because it is, as other reviewers have noted, more of a survey than a specific focus on one family's feud) can deepen appreciation for and understanding of so much more about the period. I learned a lot about how early medieval monarchy actually worked, how Vikings actually worked, and how wergild actually worked--or didn't, as the case may be.
In the end, I found the read accessible and valuable, even if straight history isn't my preferred genre. Recommended as a general introduction to Anglo-Saxon lifestyle and mindset.
I do love Anglo-Saxon literature, though, and this book opened up the familiar texts of Beowulf, Battle of Maldon, and even the tale of Robin Hood (sheriff = shire reeve: "Ooooh") in surprising and interesting ways. I'm amazed at how much just one book's survey of history (because it is, as other reviewers have noted, more of a survey than a specific focus on one family's feud) can deepen appreciation for and understanding of so much more about the period. I learned a lot about how early medieval monarchy actually worked, how Vikings actually worked, and how wergild actually worked--or didn't, as the case may be.
In the end, I found the read accessible and valuable, even if straight history isn't my preferred genre. Recommended as a general introduction to Anglo-Saxon lifestyle and mindset.
April 4, 2022
A really great book. Utilizes the story of a feud to branch out to provide insights into the families, earls and background of Northumbria, within the context of Anglo-Saxon England as a whole. It is highly detailed, considering people and events beyond merely just the most prominent and links them effectively to others in the past. Clearly distinguishes between known facts and the author's own suggestions of what happened. Even where the reader may disagree with the author's ideas, the reasoning behind them is clearly presented and alternatives are considered.
October 29, 2020
Narrative brings the 11th century to life documenting the lives of those involved in the feud that lasted for over half a century. Honour was the mark of a man in Anglo Saxon society, as Fletcher shows this was also true in the eyes of the ladies of the household, who were equally vociferous in the prosecution of blood feuds. Recommended to anyone with an interest in early medieval history.
October 11, 2018
dnf at about 30% of the way through.
I liked this book, I'm interested to know more, but I don't think I have enough knowledge of Anglo-Saxon culture to properly appreciate it. I might come back in a few years and try again.
It's not you, it's me. Sorry.
I liked this book, I'm interested to know more, but I don't think I have enough knowledge of Anglo-Saxon culture to properly appreciate it. I might come back in a few years and try again.
It's not you, it's me. Sorry.
July 19, 2019
Interesting and well written. It appealed to me because of the Yorkshire setting. However the Anglo-Saxon names take some sorting out and can be very confusing. A fairly serious interest in history is needed to enjoy this book.
December 1, 2016
There is a lot more genealogies and saints than feuding and revenge. Its an interesting examination of the general time and place, but not exactly what it promises in the title.
September 10, 2018
I have owned this book since 2003, so it was about time I read it! Everyone had amazing names, Eric Bloodaxe probably being the best.
July 7, 2020
As you would expect from Fletcher, a thoroughly entertaining and illuminating popular history.
March 5, 2022
Too dry for me
July 27, 2023
As much a broad overview of English politics from 970 to about 1080 as it is about the feud between a couple of noble families in Northumbria that lasted that long.
March 8, 2019
Read it twice
December 17, 2014
This is a decent overview of politics in Anglo-Saxon England. It might be a bit much for people who haven't read up on the period. If you have some knowledge of this period of history and this part of the world, it's a good read.
It does wander off from the implied subject about specific feuds. Frequently, it takes a much broader look at the era. I found it to be a good bit of historical writing, and enjoyed it.
Recommended for students of history and/or England.
It does wander off from the implied subject about specific feuds. Frequently, it takes a much broader look at the era. I found it to be a good bit of historical writing, and enjoyed it.
Recommended for students of history and/or England.
March 2, 2016
Essential reading if you want to deepen your knowledge of troubles 'oop noorth' in the 11thC. It helps if, like me, you are well read in the period and thus have the background knowledge to appreciate the politics involved.
October 27, 2014
It's hard to make a blood feud dry but this was in a few places.But it also was chock a block full of details of the time.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews