Civil War Volume III (History of England) by Peter Ackroyd (PDF)

Description

In Civil War, Peter Ackroyd continues his dazzling account of England’s history, beginning with the progress south of the Scottish king, James VI, who on the death of Elizabeth I became the first Stuart king of England, and ends with the deposition and flight into exile of his grandson, James II. The Stuart dynasty brought together the two nations of England and Scotland into one realm, albeit a realm still marked by political divisions that echo to this day. More importantly, perhaps, the Stuart era was marked by the cruel depredations of civil war, and the killing of a king. Ackroyd paints a vivid portrait of James I and his heirs. Shrewd and opinionated, the new King was eloquent on matters as diverse as theology, witchcraft and the abuses of tobacco, but his attitude to the English parliament sowed the seeds of the division that would split the country in the reign of his hapless heir, Charles I. Ackroyd offers a brilliant – warts and all – portrayal of Charles’s nemesis Oliver Cromwell, Parliament’s great military leader and England’s only dictator, who began his career as a political liberator but ended it as much of a despot as ‘that man of blood’, the king he executed. England’s turbulent seventeenth century is vividly laid out before us, but so too is the cultural and social life of the period, notable for its extraordinarily rich literature, including Shakespeare’s late masterpieces, Jacobean tragedy, the poetry of John Donne and Milton and Thomas Hobbes’ great philosophical treatise, Leviathan. Civil War also gives us a very real sense of the lives of ordinary English men and women, lived out against a backdrop of constant disruption and uncertainty.

User’s Reviews

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐The turbulent 17th century in England required a strong king and a leader of men. The four descendants of Mary Queen of Scots proved to have none of that in them. It is ironic that Mary lost her head to Elizabeth, but her son became king after Elizabeth’s death.James I was not a Hollywood image of a king. He was a man prone to slobbering, and “playing with his codpiece”. Coming from Scotland, and the only child of Mary Queen of Scots, he brought much of that baggage with him, and with all four of these monarchs, he fought continuously for money that was not readily offered for his fine tastes. The one thing he is most remembered for was the creation of the King James Bible. That in itself is a most interesting story, and the author could have presented much more information on this.His son Charles assumed the throne on the death of his father. Charles was a man of stubborn will, who thought way too much of himself, and foolishly aligned his throne with people not at all popular, such as the Duke of Buckingham. He had a running battle with a Parliament that increasingly sought to strip him of real power. It was so bad that Charles dissolved Parliament in 1629 for a long eleven years. It was only in April of 1640 that it was again summoned because the king needed money and the reception to this was not friendly. There was also great religious conflicts at this time. The dour Presbyterian Scots demanded no toleration of Catholicism and no acceptance of the more formal Church of England which infuriated Charles. To shorten the story, royalists and backers of parliament gathered armies. Charles I eventually was defeated and at the end of January 1649, his head was chopped off. For a period of time Oliver Cromwell assumed more of a military dictatorship, and eventually, they sent for Charles II, who had been living in Europe to assume the throne. He did and proved to be just as incompetent as his father and grandfather. With his death and no male heir, his brother James II took the crown and by 1688, he was toppled in the Glorious Revolution. It didn’t help that James was Catholic which was a clear conflict with the majority of the people and those in power.There are many other good parts of the book. The author brings up information on the arts, the way people lived, and toward the latter part of the 17th century, the economic progress of England in so many ways that brought not only wealth, but general improvements in life for the English people.The book is very readable with generally short chapters that keep you moving along. There is a much going on during this period and Ackroyd does most of it justice in a fair manner. It could easily be four volumes or more, but nobody would read it, so I recommend it. Even if you have limited background in the history of this period, you will gain knowledge from this work and I thank the author for it.

⭐I got bored and watched some YouTube videos on the English Civil War. This book just didn’t do it for me.

⭐“Rebellion,” Peter Ackroyd’s third book of five in his splendid history of England, focuses on the feckless Stuart monarchy (James I, Charles I and II, James II) along with the six years of the Cromwellian Protectorate (1653-1659). This is the historical struggle of representative governance against England’s monarchical legacy complicated by the “push pull” of religion, Protestantism versus Catholicism, in an age of burgeoning mercantilism and scientific achievement.Superbly written, wide ranging, humorous at times, Rebellion’s most entertaining chapters are when Ackroyd breaks from recounting the monarchical madness to the writings of John Milton, the genius of Isaac Newton, the diaries of Samuel Pepys, the bawdiness of plays at Drury Lane, life on the streets of London for the commoners and the many mistresses of Charles II; all gloriously ending in 1688 when James II fled to France.

⭐Apparently this book is receiving positive reviews. And no doubt it should as it fills a specific audience. It was OK but….Ackroyd writes history as journalism with a commanding facility for language. This encourages speed reading during the shallow passages. Of which there are many. In this respect the book is entertaining, or “edutaining” and one of the better examples of the genre that I’ve seen. Compared with my junior high school Stuart history from decades ago, this really is a slight work, lacking in substance, connections and, unfortunately showing some glaring omissions.Just one example: He devotes a mini chapter to Hobbes (1588-1679), who he describes as “ a genius”. John Locke (1632-1704) is not even mentioned once. They are the twin pillars of social contract theory, which blossomed with Rousseau. Ackroyd knows this. Why a short chapter extolling one and not even an acknowledgement of the existence of the other? That is not good history. I notice that another reader picks up on the holes he left, too.So I began keeping a list of persons and major events Ackroyd edited out of his history… Apart from making Locke an unperson. I gave up because the list would be longer than this review deserves.This is not intended to be forensic history and can’t be judged by such standards. There are standards, nevertheless, even in journalism. His first in the series “Foundation” was also a surf or glide through ancient history. I did enjoy his more detailed and rigorous personal investment in the second book in the series. He clearly cared about the religious issues during the Tudors. But then he did so at the cost of any meaningful assay of the equally profound changes in social administration , economics and “enterprise” . John Cabot, after all, received the first patent for his merchant adventurers. And thus began the mercantile adventures that were so important to the Stuart and especially post Jacobean regimes and political economy.So: As a pleasant and entertaining and very easy to scan introduction to an important period of English history…5 stars. Minus one for a partial and shallow treatment and minus one for egregious lacunae.I shan’t be reading any more in the series.

⭐This is the 3rd volume of Ackroyd’s History of England. Usually with multi-volume histories each epoch is allocated to a specialist author. There might be advantages to the whole project being undertaken by a general historian, but not in this instance.Perhaps because the series covers more than a thousand years, the author chooses to focus those events and actors who are the most dramatic. This is clear from the chapter headings: 15 The Crack of Doom, 25 The Gates of Hell etc. In principle this could work well enough, but we still need the main structure of the times. Fifty chronological chapters whirl past like a pathe newsreel. There is less analysis of underlying causes or reflection on the meaning of events.Liberal use is made of contemporary sources, cited verbatim. Again this might give a feel of the period, but some sections are almost stitched together from quotations, with a linking loop hooked in from the author. The significant and defining is mixed up with the trivial – thus Henrietta Maria’s duvets are in the wash with the Thirty Years’ War.This felt to me like Peter Ackroyd was seeking to distance himself from the heavy studies of the 17th century, perhaps seeking to be entertaining or popular. Obviously it depends to a degree on what you want, but I am not sure who this will satisfy. If the reader really has very little knowledge of the period, Civil War will be difficult to follow. On the other hand, the more serious student will find it shallow and superficial. Also in recent years a number of excellent histories have appeared.

⭐This book is the third volume of a six part series relating the History Of England. Peter Ackroyd is a superb writer. Amongst his work perhaps the best known books are the histories of London and of the Thames. This series, the History of England, is every bit as good if not better.This volume, which could certainly be read as a stand alone history, covers the years of the Stuart kings; James VII and I, Charles 1 and Charles II, and James VII and II. The book covers the union of the crowns of Scotland and England, the gunpowder plot, the thirty years war, civil war, the execution of a king, the republic under Cromwell, the restoration of monarchy under Charles II and finally the reign and exile of the last Stuart king to occupy the throne, James VII and II.Running as themes all throughout these years were the kings’ need for money, and the way in which parliament used that need to seek to enforce its will, often in matters of foreign policy and in matters of religion ( often intertwined). This tension created wars, revolutions, economic harm, and terrible slaughter.All of this gives plenty to read, to enjoy and to learn, and alongside this we have the creation of the Royal Society, and the work of Newton, Hooke, Pepys and Shakespeare in these years and pages.it would be hard to make all of that slow-going, and the author has certainly created a work that is at once informative and entertaining. It is a long book at almost 500 pages of narrative, but I was rather sorry when I finished it. I am now looking forward to reading volume IV

⭐I came to this, not having read the previous books or losing much about the civil war or the reign of the Stuart’s and overall I found this to be informative, interesting and maybe most of interest was just how little has changed! This moment in history is really interesting with so many themes that are still relevant today whether it be homosexuality, power, self serving decisions, sleight of hand politics, power of religion etc, etc. Ackroyd in the main plus together the information very well and is clear in his prose. My one minor criticism would be the chapters where he used what was going on in theatre and the arts as a yardstick to how the public felt at that time. In theory this was a great idea but I’m practice I found it didn’t work for me and felt out of place with the rest of the narrative. overall though this was a worthy read.

⭐I write this review based on my decades of experiences as an avid reader of all types of literature especially historical both fact and fiction.This book is written as a factual account of the history of English royalty from the death of Elizabeth.In terms of today, James was a dispicable man, a sodomite, ignorant, full of all manner of self aggrandising activity.But that is the manner of of the way of life in that day and age.Constant friction with parliament and his need for more money.Religion was just as contentious and decisive then as it is today.James, was succeeded by his surviving son Charles who in turn had even more friction with parliament. Religion more decisive and in due course the civil war with both king and parliament wanting to be top dog.And so the book goes on. Detail about jealousy, corruption and daily life. Titles for cash.There is some very interesting content about the day to day, week to week etc progression to war and genocide.There is also a fair degree of boring, to the my mind, bits and pieces written in the manner of the 1600’s making it somewhat unreadable.Overall, A decent read, spoilt at times with too much prevarication.

⭐Peter Ackroyd has written a very informative account of most of the Stuart Period, starting with James I in 1603 and ending with the Glorious Revolution in 1688. The reigns of William and Mary and Anne are excluded from this book and are included instead in the next volume in the series. The book has been written in a very readable style that makes it accessible to the layman. As well as focusing on the kings and leading statesmen, the author has cleverly interspersed the historical narrative with shorter chapters on key thinkers and writers of the time, such as Bacon, Milton, Hobbes, Newton and Pepys, which both adds to the readability and brings out the cultural achievements of the time.An excellent read for anyone interested in the Stuarts.

Keywords

Free Download Civil War Volume III (History of England) in PDF format
Civil War Volume III (History of England) PDF Free Download
Download Civil War Volume III (History of England) 2015 PDF Free
Civil War Volume III (History of England) 2015 PDF Free Download
Download Civil War Volume III (History of England) PDF
Free Download Ebook Civil War Volume III (History of England)