I first read Mattingly's book as a grammar school (high-school to readers on the other side of the pond) history student in England in the 1960s, and have been coming back to it regularly ever since for the sheer pleasure of it. My old paperback copy wore out, so my family gave me the hardback version.

The great strength of Mattingly's treatment is that he went far beyond the purely naval aspects of the campaign. He set it squarely in the context of the politico-religious struggle for domination in western Europe, with England and the Dutch Protestants on one side, Spain and all her allies and dependencies on the other, and France paralysed by a ferocious three-cornered internal struggle. He is particularly strong on the events before and after the battle of Coutras which prevented France from either pursuing the ultra-Catholic preferences of the house of Guise (of which Mary Queen of Scots' mother was a member), or the traditional French policy of opposition to the house of Hapsburg, which the Catholic King Henri of Valois and his Protestant heir-apparent Henri of Navarre would both have preferred.

I do nevertheless find two serious gaps in Mattingly's handling of the geopolitical context. The first is the Dutch, who after all had been fighting the war, and suffering the casualties, longer than anyone else except Spain. Mattingly ignores their internal dynamics and skates over the detail of their relationships with England, in both areas doing far less than justice to a key element in the strategic equation. The second gap is the lack of treatment of the Scottish dimension. Scotland, ruled by Mary's son James VI, was the dog that did not bark in the night in 1587-88, and the reasons for that deserve analysis. Yes, after his mother's death James was nearest heir to the English throne, but just HOW did he dissuade the Scots - over whom his power was strictly limited - from using the excuse for their usual descent on England?

Mattingly's general strength on the geopolitical aspects does not mean he is weak or lacking in detail on the naval and military aspects: quite the contrary. Coverage of Drake's raid on Cadiz is pretty much obligatory in a history of the Armada, and Mattingly gives it blow by blow (incidentally revealing what a thoroughly impossible man Drake was to work with). But he is equally strong on Parma's capture of Sluys, which he hoped would be his troops' embarkation point, in the face of dour resistance by the Dutch-English garrison. When it comes to the Armada itself, his grasp of detail is supreme. Mattingly was probably the first of all the many hundreds of Armada historians to read a tide-table and work out that Drake really would have had time to finish his game of bowls - had he ever played it. My only quibble here is over the Dutch naval contribution: they were never in contact with the Armada itself, but their presence scotched any possibility of Parma's forces making a rendezvous. Mattingly acknowledges their importance, but I personally would have welcomed more detail.

Mattingly belonged to the bravura school of English-language historians (Gwyn "The Vikings" Jones is another great exponent), which is both a strength and a weakness. His magnificent prose and grand narrative sweep carry the reader along on a flood tide - sometimes to the extent of concealing omissions and even (for all I know, not being a professional historian) errors. A few of his stylistic mannerisms grate a little nowadays, notably his use of "men" (as in "men said that ...") when a modern viewpoint requires acknowledgement that half the population is female. But these are minor quibbles - buy it and read it!

The defeat of the Armada inaugurated a period which, for English history at least, culminated in the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the triumph of a bourgeois science-based way of life.

In this book, Mattingly, unlike many others who have concentrated on the naval aspects of the episode, explores the motivations of the states and individuals involved. In brisk, experienced vignettes, he presents the dilemma facing the English government faced with the intractable problem of the putative heir to the throne, Mary, Quen of Scots, a Catholic, at a time when Elizabeth's throne had been explicity threatened by the Pope.

We see the weakness of France; the relentless attempts of the leading Catholic power, Habsburg Spain, to suppress the Protestant inspired revolt of Holland, which involved military action close to the Kent shore, and action in which England was already heavily involved and expensively subsidizing.

The cutting of the Gordian knot by the execution of Mary precipitated the Spanish attack. Philip II hoped to achieve several objectives at once: to remove Elizabethan Protestantism from Europe; to end English interference with his military action in Holland; finally to crush the Dutch Republic and re-establish the unity of Christendom.

The social and religious motivations of the actors are brilliantly portrayed by an expert in the diplomatic records of the period.

Perhaps the most telling thing you can say in favour of this book is that it is not written for the professional historian, but cannot be ignored by any of them.

A very readable account of (one of) the moment(s) England was challenged by a continental power and Europe hung in the balance.

Like Churchill more than three centuries later, Elizabeth I was helped quite mightely by the English Channel, but in her case the seemingly miraculous destruction of the Spanish fleet resulted in her near-deification. And rightfully so.

This has got to be one of the absolute best historical books on the Armada. Not only on the Armada but on the politics on the continent as it pertained to England and Spain. It is very accurate in its facts and portrays them in a way that brings the characters and events alive, leaving you with a craving feeling to read more and more. Written like a novel yet with the facts of a history book. A recommend for anyone looking for a gripping historical account of the struggle between Spain and England that resulted in the Armada's attempt to invade England.

Given Mattingly's insight into Mendova's political manuevers in Paris, Philip II's understanding of European powers, and the role of the Catholic Church in European politics, this was required reading for a college course on European Diplomacy (1500-1918). While a naval historian might find fault in the lack of details and maps, Mattingly does cover the moves and countermoves by the English and Spanish reasonably well, especially for novice sailors like me. However, Mattingly correctly focuses on the lasting influence of the English Enterprise by the Spanish Armada: the flawed belief of a power shift in European politics and the myth(s) it produced.

Yes, in keeping with the title of the book, the moves by Spanish Armada are covered in a "daily diary" format, which actually serves to better highlight the real driving force of this work. Mattingly loves to dive into all the source material available and gain a sense of the diplomacy, delayed communication, and potential thoughts of the majors players. In doing so, Mattingly presents all the rumors and views (circa 1588), shows how historians have ran with those "facts" (now rooted in a collective memory), but he then corrects and deals those assumptions as flawed, baseless, or plausible. For example, Drake is often given credit for defeating the Spanish Armada, though he was not in command of the British fleet. Contrary to some stories, the Spanish were not damned by poor weather, but actually had the best seas imaginable. These are minor points, but were often touchstones for historical and political spinning. Mattingly does well in not only debunking these "truths" but in determining when and why they began.

This is not revisionist history in the "politically correct" sense of the word. Rather, it lays out the various stories, notes the points of the bias, and seeks to synthesize a coherent story given the available primary sources. Mattingly presents history as it should be - a clear story driven by primary sources which respects the prism of bias inherent in sources.

Buy this book.

Some 40 years after being published first it still is an interesting and fascinating book about the developemant of Diplomacy from late Middle Ages to the 30 Years War. Mattingly's study combines the history of political facts with the type of the early modern ambassador. Therefore he draws the picture of the Italian League system (1454-1494), the struggle between Habsburg and Valois (1495-1559) and the religious tensions before 1618. We get to know that only step by step ambassadors became resident, that they were not exchanged reciprocally like today, but how the Habsburg diplomatic network was established from Spain following Italian methods and prototypes. Mattingly gives accounts of the very prominent ambassadors during the Sixteenth Century and who they were able to act. There is special evidence about the crucial relation between Spain and England. However, the descriptions of the daily life and diplomatic practice fail to present the social typus of the ambassador: Mattingly only presents the most prominent figures and does not tell us the story about the ambassador's secritaries, staff and families (though I mentions that there is somebody). But, I think, modern scholars of diplomatic history who are interested in forms of political communication and network-studies shall read Mattingly's "Renaissance Diplomacy" first.

In this classic study, Garrett Mattingly describes the development of diplomatic methods and carefully delineates the diplomatic history beginning during the Renaissance that made these diplomatic procedures necessary. As relations between European states increased during the Renaissance, and later as religious differences arose between states, a system of permanent diplomatic representation became common. Resident ambassadors represented their government, negotiated and observed their resident country. The increasing frequency of relations in Italy made resident ambassadors a necessary tool.

The breakneck speed of diplomatic relations in Italy began in Milan, who had more spendable money than the other Italian states. Mattingly follows the adoption of resident ambassador from state to state as each state discovers the advantages of resident ambassador. Mattingly follows the labyrinthine diplomacy of the Italian wars, the Hapsburg Valois wars and the religious wars, and how the use of resident ambassadors affected them. We see how individual kings adopted the use of resident ambassadors, and meet some of the more notable ambassadors. Mattingly shows how the religious wars were hard times for diplomats who served in countries with different beliefs from their own.

Mattingly displays a deep understanding of the wide range of both primary and secondary sources he has used

I look forward to this book with great eagerness. Mattingly is a rare and superb historian who not only knows his subject thoroughly but tells the tale with great novel-like suspense. This is surely an excellent companion to his other historical books which are difficult to put down, even for the historically apathetic. Mattingly died in 1962; the fact his books are still being reprinted are a testimony to his skills as historian and storyteller.