I have yet to read a book on Eleanor that I did not find interesting. She is quite a character. My recommendation is to start out by watching the film, Lion In Winter, and then graduating to books on the subject. This one would be a good place to begin.

The author did an excellent job informing the reader of the differing viewpoints regarding this amazing woman. I learned in detail about Eleanor's two husbands, her ten children, and the various enemies to the "Angevin empire." Thus this book is not just about Eleanor, but also about the historical period in which she lived.

I love this book. I first read it two years ago, and I was hooked. Anyone remotely interested in Eleanor Aquitaine should definetly read this. It's fascinating and absorbing. Two thumbs up for Desmond Seward!

This book is fast-paced, realistic, and superbly written. I recommend it to anyone who wants to learn about the Wars of the Roses, or who wants the story to be told in a more personal matter. It's another two thumbs up!

The author writes a very interesting book of a very complex time. Although I am no medevilist, Seward's presentation allowed me to follow the events and charactors through the story.

This book would interest anyone who exists in an environment devoid of rules or strong central aughority figures where the actors have strong interests they must advance or defend. Anyone in a large corporation or the political world will recognize this Machevellian climate where getting things done requires alliances with those who may abandon you around the next bend in pursuit of their objectives. I serve in a legislative body and this book at times bore strong resemblance to the tussles and battles waged on the inside of the assembly.

Seward's book is very readable and fascinating for the historical era it evokes and the inteplay of interests displayed in the ruthless struggle to come out on top.

This book is well written by an expert on the various Military-Religious Orders. The book gives great detail on the formation and history of the Order through the centuries . The books details the geneology of the current Grand Master of the Order HRH Don Ferdinando Maria, Prince of Bourbon Two Sicillies, Head of the Royal House, Duke of Calabria and Castro. and how the Order under his leadership has been recognised. Also explains how the Parma branch of the Bourbons confers membership but is not recognised by the Holy See or the Italian Republic. A fascinating history and a notably prestigious membership.

Francis I was the great contemporary of Henry VIII who met him and Cardinal Wolseley on the Field of Cloth of Gold. He also, following his ancestors Charles VIII and Louis XII, was responsible for perpetuating the Italian wars, and despite initial successes he eventually faced capture and humiliation a the hands of the Habsburgs and their allies. Still, as Seward explains, he is remembered as one of the greatest of the French kings, largely because of his magnificent contributions to art and architecture - it is said that Francis may have lost the Italian wars but imported Italian sensibilities to France. The 1973 edition of this great narrative is festooned with wonderful photographs and plates of Francis's great chateaux and his artists' great paintings and sculptures. This is a wonderful biography, whose frequent depictions of contemporary art and court life are used to transport us back to the French Renaissance.

Biographies of this great French king are few and far between. To the Anglo-Saxon mind he's overshadowed in the Renaissance by his contemporary in England, Henry VIII, and among French Kings he doesn't cut quite the figure of Louis XIV. But historically, Francis I, was as important as either of them. As a contemporary friend and rival of Henry VIII, Charles V of Austria (the Holy Roman Empire) and Spain, and Suleiman the Magnificent of Turkey, as well as the Medici Pope Leo X, he brought the Renaissance to continental Europe, and created the circumstances which allowed it to become something wholly continental and not simply Byzantine. It is he who is responsible for some of the world's most magnificent architecture, the Chateaux of the Loire river, and he was patron to some of the greatest artists of the era, including Leonardo Da Vinci, and Benvenuto Cellini, as well as to the great poet Clement Marot. Seward gives interesting insight into Francis 1's relationship with the women in his life, his controlling mother, Louise of Savoy, his devoted sister Marguerite of Navarre, his wives, Queen Claude of France, and Eleanor of Austria (sister of Charles V of Spain), his mistress Madame D'Estampes, and his daughter-in-law, Catherine De Medici. Seward also shows in specific detail Francis' military strengths and weaknesses, his famous victory at Marignano, and more decisive failure at Pavia which finally lost the French control over the duchy of Milan. He also provides a good look at how Francis contributed to and was affected by the controversies surrounding the Reformation in a time when nothing, religiously above all, was certain. Surprisingly, Calvin even dedicated some works to Francis. What emerges is the portrait of a quintessentially French king who not only laid the groundwork for the absolute political power of the monarchy in France, but for many ideals of culture, literature, education and diplomacy which survive in Occidental Civilization to this day.

This is a straightforward and well presented narrative history of the Hundred Years War. It concentrates mostly on the military conflict, with some asides on major figures. It is quite detailed and pithy. On these terms it's a good book. Alas it gives short shrift to the wider aspects of the war and the time. The rest of Europe, the Great Schism, the growth of nationalities, the effects of the Black Death ... these all get only a glancing look. I also hoped for more on military tactics and weaponry.

The Hundred Years War is about the war that the English fought with the French. Due to the fact that the French had no king and the pretext was that the English king had the right to the French throne . The two groups of people involved in this story were the English crown and Army, and the French Noble(wo)men and the French Army. England repeatedly invaded France and the French, which was a small, weak country at that time, stood strong against the English. Due to France's lack of resources and weaknesses, their army wasn't that strong. The English dominated most of the war and won most of the major battles. During the period of the war, one of the major things that happened was Joan of Arc, who lead Charles VII to become the king of France and France finally had a sovereign. My favorite character was France because they were more disposed to win the war by using whatever they could find. They also had much better looking armor.

I did liked the book. My favorite parts were the battles where Joan of Arc was. I didn't quite like the begining because it went pretty slow. If I could change anything in the book it would be adding more exitement in the starting part, because I'm an author also and I know what most of the people want.

I think I might recommend this book to a person who might like history.

This is an excellent, if rapid, retelling of the hundred years war, which was not one war, but a series of bloody conflicts, started by the English refusal to recognize the French salic law which denied inheritance through the female line. Edward III' s mother Queen Isabella was the daughter of king Phillip the Fair, and as such many, including Edward, felt that he,NOT King Phillip's nephew ought to inherit the throne.Meanwhile in France, dependence of salic law had only recently been revived and was, of course being used for political reasons, including specifically that of keeping an Englishman off the throne. Alas, nothing is even so simple and there were many pretenders and schisms, including the Great schism between the Popes of Avignon and Rome as well as between French factions during this period. Seward covers the motivations for conflict, on different class levels, as well as the effects of various conflicts and gives us some great characters. There are several genealogical charts which explain the dynastic imperatives, as well as a real attention to military detail, the descriptions of different kinds of weaponry, particularly English bow and arrow versus French crossbow are impressive. And several battles are accompanied by military diagrams, so that those who are military minded can have a real grasp of the actions at Crecy and Agincourt, for example, as well as of the military intelligence of Edward III, John of Gaunt, Henry V and Joan of Arc. Seward relies on many primary sources, but in particular on Froissart and the Bourgeois of Paris (whom I had not heard of.) He quotes Shakespeare and ancient songs appropriately at the beginning of each chapter, and provides an excellent appendix of maps showing the vicissitudes of French territories and English occupations, as well as an appendix explaining the meaning of the currencies in the economics of the time. This is a straightforward, exceedingly comprehensive, delineation of one of the most confusing occasions in Western European history. One is still left confused at the end about how and why the dynastic, commercial, political and military factors interacted as they did however. And it becomes very difficult to sort one French King and political pretender from another. I never did quite figure out what Phillip of Burgundy was up to.

One has the sense that Seward might have better served his purpose by writing a book a hundred pages longer with attentions to the less heady but equally important details of character, personality and relationship. Maurice Druon's fictional series "The Cursed Kings" (1-6) makes a good introduction to the Political events that led up to the start of the Hundred Years war.

Those who admire Shakespeare's Henry V and Kenneth Branagh's film adaptation, and who are curious about the real King Henry, will find this book to be a good read: fluently and clearly written, neither too short nor too long. Henry was a sort of monster; he was also a great man. The human race naturally admires such men, and for that reason one should not fault Shakespeare for creating a great national hero out of a ruthless military genius. What is remarkable is that so much of the real Harry comes through in the play. Even so, the disasters of war inflicted on the French are appalling to read about in this book. The Nazi occupation was mild in comparison. The French are notorious for their aversion to English speakers. Is the reason, as Desmond Seward says, the memory of this quintessential English hero?

Shakespeare's Henry V forms the basis for most people's impression of this monarch. This remarkably effective piece of propaganda presents Henry as an inexperienced and brave young man with a number of attractive features. In this fine book, Desmond Seward presents a realistic picture of Henry V that is quite different from the Henry in Shakespeare. While Henry came to the throne at a young age, he was already an experienced commander and administrator. His skills had been developed in the rather vicious politics of contemporary England and by the leading role he played in subduing rebellion in Wales. Based on a careful reading of sources and his extensive knowledge of Medieval Europe, Seward presents Henry as an unusually capable and ruthless leader bent on consolidating royal authority in England and conquering France. Seward's well justified analysis of Henry's motivations are based on Henry's insecurity over his claim to the throne, which had been usurped by his father. Seward infers that the undoubtedly pious Henry regarded his attempt to conquer France as a trial by God over the issue of the legitimacy of his crown. Henry's successes then were sanction of his efforts to conquer France and his right to occupy the throne of England. This book provides fine narrative of Henry's life as a soldier and campaigner. Seward's descriptions of Medieval warfare and politics are excellent. He addresses well why a small and relatively sparsely populated country like England could do so well in combat against the French. Seward addresses also the question of why the English presence proved to evanescent. My only complaint with this book is that it did not cover other aspects of Henry's life. This is not entirely fair as Seward aimed at covering Henry's life as a attempted conquerer and he achieves his aims easily. This is not an attempt at a comprehensive biography. Seward's intelligent treatment of these aspects of Henry's life makes me wish he had attempted a broader book.

Henry V was one of the most evil kings to occupy the English throne. Shakespeare's play about him glorified him because he conquered so much territory in France. Even though he only occupied the English thorne for 9 years, he caused 600 years of political damage between France and England. His motto was, "I'm the scourge of God and I'm here to punish men for their sins."

Normandy, one of the best grain producing regions of France was practically raised to the ground. It was devastated along with other northern regions of France. The English murdered, raped, pillaged, and committed almost every kind of evil to France during this period of medieval history.

After his victory at Agincourt in 1415, Henry V invaded France while it was in a civil war. At the Treaty of Troyes, he dictated his own terms for the future of France. Charles VI, "the mad king of France", didn't have a say in the treaty because he was insane. Henry took advantage of this. In the treaty, it stated that Henry would marry Charles'daughter and if Charles VI died, Henry would become both king of England and France.

When the Hundred years war was dormant, Henry rekindled it for another 50 years. His only reason was to declare that he was the true heir to the French throne. During those 50 years the English committed so many atrosities to France, they paled in comparison to what the Saracens did to the Crusaders. This is the main reason the French mistrust and dislike the English to this day.

This well written book is intended as a concise introduction to an interesting and important topic, the military orders of the Middle Ages. Seward covers the founding of the major orders, their organization, and major episodes of their history. To do real justice to this topic would be an immense task as the story covers centuries of European history. Seward elected to produce an overview giving an outline of their history and highlighting some of the more picturesque episodes. This book, consequently, sometimes has a superficial quality. I would have liked, for example, a better description of the role of the Templars in Medieval commerce and banking.
Seward shows that the military orders were born in the Crusading zeal that infected Medieval Europe and were founded initially to help and safeguard pilgrims to the Holy Land. They promptly became a unique Medieval hybrid, combining Cistercian monasticism and Chivalric knightly values. Rapidly gaining influence in the Crusader Kingdoms and considerable wealth in Europe, the military orders were significant actors in the complicated politics of the Eastern Mediterrenean. Similar orders developed on other important frontiers between Christian Europe and non-Christian polities, notably in Spain and the eastern Baltic littoral. In Spain, the military orders were the shock troops of the Reconquista. In the Baltic, the Teutonic Knights led the conquest and Christianization of Prussia and what is now a good part of the Baltic states.
Seward shows well how the military orders become an integral component of religous and political life in Europe. A consistent theme is that the growth in importance of the orders was accompanied by involvement in the complex dynastic, political, and religous struggles of Medieval Europe and the Crusader States. The decline of the military orders in the Early Modern period was a result of the increasing power of European monarchies and declining need for their essential mission, the military struggle against non-Christians. The military orders of Iberia were essentially absorbed by the Church and monarchies, the great Templar order was destroyed by the expanding power of the French monarchy, and the Hospitallers were marginalized by their expulsion from the Eastern Mediterrenean and the ultimate success of European struggle against the Ottoman empire. Some of the orders survive today as charitable institutions associated with the remains of the European nobility.

This book is well written and presents an objective view of the history of the military religious orders. Not only a work of history, it does well anthropologically in elucidating the mindset behind the military monk and the object of his work. Furthermore, it explains what many historians neglect or consider only quickly, viz. the military religious orders of Spain and their role the the Crusades. The history of the Teutonic Knights and the Knights Templar (including the circumstances surrounding their demise) are treated well.

The author pays particular attention to the sieges of Rhodes and Malta when treating of the Sovereign Military Order of St. John the Baptist (the Order of the Knights of Malta). This account is no less than phenomenal. The Knights of Malta facing insane, overwhelming, and what should be impossible odds, and overcoming them--habitually--would strain any movie-goer's ability to suspend disbelief; yet these events happened and are accurately illustrated.

If one is considering a well researched overview of the history of the major religious military orders, then I highly recommend this book, especially for the student of history. One should find it academic and enjoyable.

Much can be said for this fine piece of historical writing. First, the book covers in detail a subject that is generally dealt with as a curiousity at best. The author does justice to the motives, organization, methods and mentality of those organizations that made up the military orders. As has been pointed out, the writing can be a bit dense, but this I attribute to a British author's assumption that his readers will be well educated in the general history of the period; so too bad us, not too bad him.
Aside from the numerous facts and anecdotes which illuminate the book, I found the work of particular interest to one who struggles to understand the medieval mind. We moderns can only scratch our collective heads when confronted with a concept like "monks of war". However, once the mind is opened to the reality of the period, and the mindset of an age of faith, much that has been lost becomes understandable again.
Thus, the greatest value of this book is that it takes the reader on a journy of discovery to a world that belonges to each of us. The Crusades, La Reconquista and numerous other episodes can now be studied in their true light.
This is a book well worth reading.

"Licentious or bigoted, noble or ignoble, there has seldom been a dull Bourbon," wrote Nancy Mitford. The Bourbon kings of France and Navarre ruled for more than two centuries and made France the greatest power in Europe -- but they also ended the monarchy in France, first by being one of the major causes of the Revolution and then by refusing to rule by constitution after their post-Napoleonic restoration. Seward is a Paris-born, Cambridge-trained historian who succeeds in combining scholarship with lively readability.

...on modern history as Napoleon & Adolf Hitler. Unfortunately their hands are soaked in blood. Desmond Steward endeavors to compare & contrast the two dictators. This is done alternating back & forth telling their stories from the beginning. He succeeds in this. Hitler may have been loathe to admit it but it appears he took cues from Napoleon although his hero worship of Fredrick the Great of Prussia & admiration of Clauswitz is evident. Perhaps he had a desire to succeed where Napoleon failed. This in turn hastened his own departure from the world stage faster in fact than Napoleon. Emotionally, they were bound by their common meglomania & absolute belief that providence had decreed that it was their destiny to rule Europe-and beyond. England tormented them both. Each had elaborate plans for the invasion of Britain. Both had moments of clarity when even they realized that an invasion would not succeed. However, Napoleon warred constantly with England with a few years of suspicious peace. Hitler did not wish to fight England at all & tried more than once to make peace. Neither could match England's navy. They were essentially land-lubbers. Their ruin, of course lay in their invasions of Russia. The Russians played the same game twice. Fall-back, fall-back & then let the famous Russian winter finish them off. Both could have succeeded. After conquering vast areas of Europeon Russia they could have both sought a favorable peace. It would have brought all parties the time they needed. The Czar wanted peace. Likewise, Napoleon was bleeding France white. Stalin wanted time for the allies to establish a second front in western Europe. Hitler needed time-off from fighting on two fronts. It could have happened except Napoleon's ego and Hitler hatred of bolshiveikism & the Russian people in general prevented that. They departed on their views of race. Napoleon felt the Jews an asset to France. We know Hitler's views. Napoleon died a slow death on the island of St. Helena in virtual seclusion & thus was able to nurture a heroic legend through his writings. History has treated him more kindly as a result. Hitler had no such luxury. He committed suicide in his bunker while Berlin crumbled above him. As for the narration, Fredrick Davidson's use of French & German pharases sounded arrogant and was off-putting. His impersonations of Hitler & Napoleon sounded like Beldar Conehead.