Edward IV (The English Monarchs Series)

A good edition in an excellent series.

Ross has written a thorough and persuasive account of the reign of the first Yorkist king, Edward IV. Overall an effective monarch, Edward bungled his continental foreign policy and war with Scotland. He can be faulted too for not securing the throne for his twelve-year-old son, by leaving his wife's unpopular Woodville family and his powerful brother, Duke Richard of Gloucester, at daggers drawn upon his early and untimely death in 1483.

I've read most of the Monarchs series and I find some very readable and some quite dry. This falls into the latter category for me. The book isn't a standard biography from birth to death, it's split into chapters focusing on areas of the king's responsibilities and relationships. I.e. a chapter on parament, a chapter on marriage, a chapter on international relations. The chapters can be needlessly detailed with list after list of names, places, monetary amounts/costs/income, etc.If you're studying Edward IV on an academic level, then I'm sure this is very useful but for a casual reader I wouldn't recommend..

Excellent book

this book is so interesting. it has been very well researched and i really enjoyed reading it. highly recommended to all

pleased

Bought for coursework reference.

Impressive in detail but lacks penetrative analysis that would come with a narrower focus. This is a common problem for historical biographies. Focuses too much on patronage.

Edward IV is one of the great enigmas of history. Even how he was able to become King is not self-evident. His seizing the throne was then followed by government marked by occasional brilliance and great folly. For someone who at times was keenly aware of dynastic considerations, his own marriage was the height of folly compounded by giving far too much influence to the Queen's relatives. He gave far too much trust, power and wealth to a few individuals, especially the Earl of Warrick and his traitorous brother Clarence alienating in the process much of the established nobility and wrecking in his early years the King's finances. Overthrown in the course of his reign, he nevertheless succeeded in recapturing the throne in short order and then repairing his fortunes spectacularly. Even so, this was accompanied by the strangest series of preparations for invasion of France, ending in an almost farcical procession in Northern France and a pusillanimous retreat. Lazy, debauched, perceptive and effective-many such adjectives can be applied to him - and all miss the puzzling essence of the man and his reign. What a set of stories could be woven out of this material without clearly capturing the essence of the situation! One cannot help wondering why of the adult kings between Richard II and Henry VII, Edward IV alone did not attract Shakespeare's pen.Charles Ross wrote a fascinating book on this puzzling ruler, making as clear as the scanty and somewhat unreliable records allow the course of Edward's life and reign, and the various episodes that both fascinate and puzzle. The book (with a short introduction by R.A. Grifffiths rather than a revision by him) proceeds first by laying out the story, and then returning to give separate investigation of various aspects of Edward's rule, such as governance, his relations with the community and his finances. This latter subject is particularly well handled, as is the penultimate chapter on law and order. The story is well told, without excessive pedantry and without any attempt to hide when the record is unclear or the author has had to make large interpretations. One may not really know or understand Edward by the end of the book, but one's feeling is that it is the man himself who escapes capture by the biographer's art, not any weakness of the biographer himself. For those interested in such matters - and this is not light reading - Griffith's biography should prove highly satisfying.

Thorough and reliable. Additionally, the book was clear even when dealing with matters of 15th century political life. There is little of "Edward IV the man " although this may have been impossible given the dearth of source material.

There is an old phrase that goes `never hire two brothers to work for you, because they will always be more loyal to each other than they will ever be to you, and if they are not, who can trust a man who cannot trust his own brother?' The sons of the Duke of York were apparently not very trust worthy. Over all King Edward IV seems to have been a very good king, but his family problems would show why the House of York would not reign long after its founder.This book is interesting not only for what it does talk about but also for what it does not. Ross never deals with the allegations of Edward's illegitimacy other than to mention that allegations exist. I personally believe that he was the Duke of York's son, but you would think a biographer would discuss it even if only to point out how ridiculous the allegations were.Unlike Henry IV, I do not think it would be right to describe Edward IV as a self-made king, even though he was not born destined for the crown and had to win it twice. At first he comes across as an aristocratic teenager with good pedigree that is placed on the throne by powers greater than he, led by the Earl of Warwick. However, much like Emperor Claudius of Rome, once in power he clearly knows how to use it. Far from being Warwick's pawn he is a true king with his own ideas how to do things. Although he loses his throne in 1470 he comes right back the next year to recover it and from then on is as strong as ever.King Edward IV's son-in-law, King Henry VII, is the king most accredited with creating a very powerful English monarchy; the reason Henry is able to do so is by respecting and adding on to the system that had already been established by Edward. Although Edward's life is adventurous, in some ways, he pales in comparison with the warrior kings Edward III and Henry V; however I think Edward IV's greatness is the fact that he did not involve his kingdom in any long foreign wars that would tact the English resources into poverty. In other words, unlike some other Kings of England he did not try foolishly prove to the world he was the rightful King of France. King Edward stayed at home and tried to improve his own kingdom. His ideas were so productive that Henry Tudor would go on to mimic them."To rescue the crown from financial abyss into which the Lancastrians had plunged it was no mean achievement. To die solvent was something no other English king had achieved for more than two hundred years. Henry VII had the great advantage of being able to build upon the foundations laid by his father-in-law. Indeed, the best testimony to the quality of Edward's financial policies is the degree to which the shrewd and calculating Henry held firm to them."(p.386)His main problem seems to be with his own family. The reason the House of York was unable to entrench itself for the long term had to do with in-fighting amongst the its members. Edward had two younger brothers when he was king: Prince George, the Duke of Clarence and Prince Richard, the Duke of Gloucester. The elder of the two (Clarence) tried multiple times to usurp his older brother and was many times forgiven, but he tried one rebellion too much and was executed under Edward's orders. The fact he put his own brother to death--no matter how justified--would soil his reputation. The younger seemly loyal brother was an asset to his rule and Edward trusted him. But the evil Richard would betray that trust after Edward dies, by deposing his brother's elder son and having both of his sons murdered. King Richard III would blacken the name of his lost brother who ruled England effectively for twenty years. Richard's plans would unravel as Henry Tudor, who increases his own legitimate standing by marring the eldest daughter of King Edward IV, overthrows him.This is a great book detailing the events of the brutal Wars of the Roses the brought the English monarchy to great highs and lows in very short periods of time. The reader is left thinking that if only Edward had lived one more decade he would have been able to put his own son, King Edward V, securely on the throne and history might have taken a far different turn. Edward IV is a tale of triumph and tragedy

Edward IV of England deposed the weak king--Henry VI of England, who had gone insane. Edward took the throne in 1461. In doing so, he set off a civil war within the royal Plantagenet family over the succession to the throne of England. This civil war became known as the "War of the Roses" and involved the nobles of England chosing sides between the "Lancaster" branch or the "York" branch side of the family. The "Lancastrians" were the branch of the Plantagenet family that claimed direct descent from John of Gaunt, third son of King Edward III of England. They fought to have the descendants of Henry VI succeed to the throne of England in place of the mad king--Henry VI.On the other side, the "Yorks" sought to recognize Edward IV who traced his ancestry to Edmund, Duke of York, the fourth son of King Edward III. However, because Edmund's son, Richard, Earl of Cambridge had married Anne Mortimer who was descended from Lionel of Antwerp, the second son of Edward III, the Yorkists claimed to have a superior claim to the throne of England through Anne of Mortimer.Long before going insane, Henry VI had become very unpopular in England because the wars that he had conducted in France had lost England all the territory that Henry VI's father--the heroic Henry V--had gained for England. As is shown in the Shakespeare plays Henry V and Henry VI (Part 1), England was very proud of the accomplishments of Henry V in France and were bitterly disappointed when Henry VI lost every bit of the territory that his father had conquered in France in a matter of a few years.This book by Charles Ross is a very complete and yet very easy to read history of the reign of Edward IV. I found it as enjoyable and as exciting as a as a novel to read.

Mr. Ross has filled the book with all the facts one needs but he cannot tell a story. It is poorly written and the illustrations (in the paperback) are printed badly. I have just finished five other books on the “War of the Roses” and without them, I wouldn’t know what the heck is going on. If you need a door stop this is your book.