Charles Carlton does an excellent job in describing the English civil wars from 1638-1651. He retells each battle in stunning detail, and allows the reader to delve into the minds of the soldiers and civilians involved in the conflict. Carlton uses a brilliant list of primary sources and quotations which further expand the overall effectiveness the book has for the reader. This book should be highly recommended for any student of English or military history.

This books rates up there (or down there) with Venetia Murray's AN ELEGANT MADNESS. Like that book, the author has some nice illustrations. Like that book, the book is full of inaccuracies and mistakes (did you know for example, that George IV and Mrs Fitzherbert had 10 children, together? News to the long-deceased lady who had no issue by three marriages). And for accuracy with titles, forget it.

About half the book focuses on the Hanoverians, the Coburgs (Edward VII) and to some extent, the Windsors. While the Stuarts certainly are not neglected, the first half of the millenium (the Conqueror's family, the Angevins/Plantagenets) are largely neglected. There is no mention, for example, of the fact that Henry I's eldest illegitimate son, Robert, Earl of Gloucester was the most loyal supporter of his legitimate half-sister the Empress Matilda (Maud) in her battle with her cousin Stephen for the throne. And very little about Henry's other illegitimate children, except a mention that two of them died with their legitimate half-brother in a shipwreck. There is no mention of the fact that Rosamond Clifford, mistress of Henry II, was mother of William Longsword. And forget it, if you want to read anything about the mistresses of the Scottish kings before James VI & I and his mother Mary, Queen of the Scots. [The Welsh don't even get a look in, of course].

In fact, this book is mostly about the Stuarts and Hanoverian royal favorites (male and female), although the cover should have warned the reader (featuring, as it does, a portrait of Nell Gwynn).

To be fair, the author does discuss the political influence of some of the favorites, as well as the role they played in changing British history. [Hint: male favorites were far more influential, but the book would not sound so joicy if labelled otherwise]. Interestingly, the Villiers family looms large in the narrative with George Villiers bringing his whole family with him (a la Wydville) when he rose to the bed of James I. His relative Barbara Villiers was mistress of Charles II, while another relative Elizabeth Villiers was mistress of William III (of William and Mary). Both women and their male relative obtained many titles for their descendants and relatives. Today, at least one English duke and one Scottish earl (the terms refer to the peerage, not the nationality) trace their lineage to a royal mistress; many other peers and notables are descended from Charles II's many bastards. [There are some excellent books on royal bastards, which do a much better job checking facts and dates].

This book is a light read, and not one to be read if you are looking for detailed information on a particular monarch's amours (no bibliography is provided for each monarch, although footnotes help locate some sources for additional information).

The Stuarts are best served, but be wary when the author turns to the Hanoverians (when he appears to rely on second-hand sources). It is true that George I had a mistress, but one woman alleged to be his mistress was actually his illegitimate half-sister (and George I was not apparently her lover).

From the political point of view, I found the early Hanoverian chapter most interesting, when the author discussed the political maneuvering of the mistresses of the first two Georges. I was aware of course of the role played by certain ladies in the South Sea Bubble, and the importance of this scandal in Walpole's career. But reading about the role these mistresses played in developing the relationship between the King and the Prime Minister was certainly interesting. I wanted to read more at this point; unfortunately, the author moved on to discuss the Royal Marriages Act (the reign of George III) and so forth.

While I cannot recommend this book because of the many errors in titles, parentage, issue, and dates, a casual reader might still find this book of interest. Just beware of the errors. Some of them are obvious, others less so.

I wish that there was a better-researched book focusing on royal favorites (a nice generic term) from the early Middle Ages to the late Hanoverian period, particularly on their effects on politics and society. From that point, the antics of the Saxe-Coburgs and Windsors are less than relevant. Well, I am still looking...