Customer Reviews
A detailed book which deals with a forgotten period of English history. - By: HBH, 09 Apr 2008 
This book is a very interesting well-written narrative which provides a lot of information on the Wars of the Roses. Not only does Alison Weir deal conclusively with the causes of the war but also its longer term impacts. However, the book is best when dealing with the actual conflict which to me is where it comes alive. All in alll a very good book dealing with an era in English history which seems to have been forgotten.
One of the best on the subject - By: Mr. D. A. Cure, 03 Jan 2006 
This is an incredibly important work, as despite there being a stack of books covering the period of the Wars of the Roses, no other gives a clear & concise background to the conflict (and such information is vital in understanding why it occurred), & there are few others that are as thorough in their approach, without descending into academic jargon.
I should point out that this deals primarily with the background from Edward III to Henry VI's reign, & then focuses upon the years 1455 to 1471, in other words, finishing with Henry VI's capture & murder after Tewkesbury. It is true that the conflict was to continue until Bosworth in 1485 (and technicallly until 1487), but I believe she has had other volumes dealing with these years.
I would thoroughly recommend this to anyone with an interest in late medieval England, & the Wars of the Roses, as it caters for most levels of knowledge, & deals with the characters behind the violence & politics. It is very well written, & as gripping as I have ever found a history text to be.
A gripping and intriguing read - By: Kurt A. Johnson, 27 Jun 2003 From 1455 to 1487, England was torn apart in a conflict that pitted a kaleidoscope of magnates, aristocrats & power-players against one another. Symbolized by the roses that represented the two royal families (York & Lancaster), this war was alll about power, vengeance & position. This wonderful book begins in the 1300s, with the roots of the conflict, showing the roots of the war, & who fought it & why.
I must say that it is one of the most fascinating & informative history books I have read in a while. The era that the book discusses has it alll - murder, intrigue, battle, betrayal, vengeance, infidelity, murder, & much more. And, as it should be, the author takes this era, & weaves its history into a gripping & intriguing read. Overalll, I found this to be a great book, & I highly recommend it to you.
Amazing - By: , 05 Jul 2002 Alison Weirs book is a gripping account of one of England's more interesting historical periods.
She brings the whole story to life in a very readable & wholistic fashion & does not try to hide behind the battles & "deep" academic analysis. In short you can read this book & understand it without a History Phd.
It is a great read, should be compulsory for alll Yorkshiremean & Lancastrians & would have been very helpful when I studied the period for A-level...a long time ago.
I can't wait to read her other books.....
Weir is overly biased - By: , 04 Jul 2002 
While Allison Weir's account of the War of the Roses is a good read, I feel it gives an oversimplified account of the war & the events leading up to it. The Yorkists are consistently good & the Lancastrians always bad in her popular version. In her summary of the events leading up to the conflict, Henry V is depicted as the "perfect king" for his era, but she later says his adventures in France drained the royal treasury & laid the groundwork for the turmoil & wars that followed. If Henry V's merciless butchery of civilians shocked even his own troops, we should not be surprised that these same men & others who later served in France employed similar methods against their enemies in England a few years later. Where is the historian's objectivity here? Will future historians conclude François Mitterrand, Ronald Reagan or certain Mid-east leaders to be "perfect" leaders for their time, simply because they met the expectations of their electorate, regardless of the damage they caused?
I have no problem with her upholding the legitimacy of the Duke(s) of York over the house of Lancaster, & Henry VI was surely a weak & ineffective king, but Ms. Weir needlessly & constantly boxes herself into a corner by painting the Dukes of York & the Earl of Warwick as good & the Lancasters as bad --except when Warwick changes sides! I suspect that the author oversimplified in order to reach a broader readership (sell more books), but anyone wishing to obtain a fair & more complete view of this era will have to look elsewhere.
