The Wars of the Roses: A Concise History [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

The fault lay not with Shakespeare but with my knowledge of English history. The depth of my ignorance about several periods of history is unfathomable. Among those areas of ignorance are several of the military conflicts in European history. I know that there was a Hundred Years War (that lasted considerably more than a hundred years), a Thirty Years War (that I believe was fought in the early 17th century for God knows what reason), and the Wars of the Roses. To be perfectly honest, until recently I had no idea when the Wars of the Roses were fought, between whom, nor why. Imagine my delight when I discovered that this was precisely the conflict with which most of Shakespeare's historical plays dealt. Learn about this period of English history, and I have the background I need to read RICHARD III and the other historical plays. After some brief research, this volume appeared to be one that would give me what I needed to know about the conflict.

I have to admit that it did the trick. I have now restarted reading RICHARD III, and I not only understand Shakespeare's narrative, I know his account of things is extraordinarily wrong! Primarily he changes chronology to suit his purposes, and recreates historical scenes that could not have happened. There is no evidence according to Ross that Richard in any way plotted against either his brother Edward IV (he in fact seems to have been his staunchest supporter) nor that he machinated his brother Clarence's imprisonment (Clarence was the tool of Warwick, who pushed him forward as a pretender to the throne). Nor was there ever a time when Margaret could have made her long, impassioned speech. Actual historical chronology would have precluded it. In short, Shakespeare recreated history for dramatic effect, and painted Richard far, far blacker than he in fact deserved. He was not, however, a nice guy. Most historians agree that he probably did have his nephews murdered, and there is some evidence that he killed his wife Anne (daughter of Warwick) with the idea of marrying his niece Elizabeth (who in fact married Henry Tudor, later Henry VII). Shakespeare more or less gave the Tudor party line, and then some. Had Richard III won the Battle of Bosworth, he undoubtedly would have painted Richard as a great hero, and Henry Tudor as a black hearted villain.

For those who like the books to be pleasant to look upon, I am happy to report that THE WARS OF THE ROSES is a beautifully produced paperback book, sewn in signature, printed on high quality paper, with a huge number of well-reproduced photographs. In short, quite apart from the content--which was excellent--it was a complete pleasure to hold and look at this book. It certainly enhanced the reading experience.

I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a survey on the Wars of the Roses! Readers who are interested in biographies of the kings will want to read Ross' biographies of Edward IV and Richard III.