What do you think?
The Battle of Bosworth
On an August morning five hundred years ago to the sound of thundering hooves, gunshot, the clash of steel and the cries of men in battle, Richard III, king of England, lost his life and the Plantagenet line came to an end.
But what do we really know of the battle which became known as Bosworth Field? How do we separate the fact from legend when our knowledge is based on sources which by any reckoning are meagre, garbled or partisan?
In this book, Michael Bennett provides as detailed and authoritative a reconstruction of the battle as is possible, but more than this, he engages the reader into the actual 'detective' work involved. Much of the fascination of the military clash itself lies in the dramatic events which led up to it and indeed a reconstruction of what happened on 22nd August 1485 requires a knowledge of the events and experiences which had shaped the lives of various combatants. The author, therefore, provides the background of war and politics in the thirty years before Bosworth beginning with the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses, running through the Yorkist achievements and concluding with the insecurities of Richard III's reign. He focuses specifically on the careers, the hopes and the fears of the main protagonists at Bosworth: the king; the pretender, Henry Tudor; their respective supporters; and the main power-brokers.
The stage is thus set for a detailed reconstruction of the political and military manoeuvres in 1485 and the way prepared for a wide-ranging analysis of the meaning and significance of the Battle of Bosworth in English History.
Michael Bennett has utilised all of the major primary source material on the battle, has newly translated Polydor Vergil and the Crowland Chronicle and provided the first translation of Jean Molinet. The result is a book which is accurate, exciting and readable, backed up with nearly a hundred specially selected illustrations.
But what do we really know of the battle which became known as Bosworth Field? How do we separate the fact from legend when our knowledge is based on sources which by any reckoning are meagre, garbled or partisan?
In this book, Michael Bennett provides as detailed and authoritative a reconstruction of the battle as is possible, but more than this, he engages the reader into the actual 'detective' work involved. Much of the fascination of the military clash itself lies in the dramatic events which led up to it and indeed a reconstruction of what happened on 22nd August 1485 requires a knowledge of the events and experiences which had shaped the lives of various combatants. The author, therefore, provides the background of war and politics in the thirty years before Bosworth beginning with the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses, running through the Yorkist achievements and concluding with the insecurities of Richard III's reign. He focuses specifically on the careers, the hopes and the fears of the main protagonists at Bosworth: the king; the pretender, Henry Tudor; their respective supporters; and the main power-brokers.
The stage is thus set for a detailed reconstruction of the political and military manoeuvres in 1485 and the way prepared for a wide-ranging analysis of the meaning and significance of the Battle of Bosworth in English History.
Michael Bennett has utilised all of the major primary source material on the battle, has newly translated Polydor Vergil and the Crowland Chronicle and provided the first translation of Jean Molinet. The result is a book which is accurate, exciting and readable, backed up with nearly a hundred specially selected illustrations.
199 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1985
About the author
Michael Bennett
5 books2 followersLibrarian note: There are multiple authors with this name in this data base. This one is Michael^^^^^Bennett.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
June 10, 2020
Not being over-familiar with fifteenth century history, I struggled to get through this work seemingly taking about as long to read it as Henry Tudor did to invade unopposed and progress slowly to the battle site. The book is poorly titled as over half the near 200 pages are gone before you actually get to the less than exhaustive detail of the battle itself.
The opening is not encouraging: the author says sources for the battle are meagre, frequently muddled, inconsistent and subject to partisan distortion. Then the account veers off topic with oodles of tenuous links to past events (some over 100 years old or more).
I found the most interesting part was the Appendix giving details of the main sources, dovetailing with the comments in the opening remarks. In between these book-ends, there was a lot of variable information to battle through.
The opening is not encouraging: the author says sources for the battle are meagre, frequently muddled, inconsistent and subject to partisan distortion. Then the account veers off topic with oodles of tenuous links to past events (some over 100 years old or more).
I found the most interesting part was the Appendix giving details of the main sources, dovetailing with the comments in the opening remarks. In between these book-ends, there was a lot of variable information to battle through.
October 5, 2013
A book that's firmly in the 'that Richard, ''e did it'' and definitely pro Tudor *sigh* despite the fact it's called The Battle of Bosworth, gives little detail that you can't find in an average history book. Plus points, (as any historian knows) in this regard do include in this work the age-old problem of 'where did this battle actually take place, and when' but this historiography tailed off to talk of the Tudors once more.
Indeed, it was not the epoch ending battle that convention dictates, and does not mark the end of the Middle Ages in England, but that's not been taught as true for decades, so despite the fact this book is less than 5 years old, it's already sounding rather dated. If he tried to research who did kill the princes, then his results are more vague than inconclusive.
It would be a good introductory book for GCSE/A level provided one keeps an open mind about Richard's motives for taking the throne,(rather than the one-sided portrayal here) and his role in disposing of his nephews. Sadly, this is/are THE issue(s) of his reign so I put the finished book down, still dissatisfied.
Indeed, it was not the epoch ending battle that convention dictates, and does not mark the end of the Middle Ages in England, but that's not been taught as true for decades, so despite the fact this book is less than 5 years old, it's already sounding rather dated. If he tried to research who did kill the princes, then his results are more vague than inconclusive.
It would be a good introductory book for GCSE/A level provided one keeps an open mind about Richard's motives for taking the throne,(rather than the one-sided portrayal here) and his role in disposing of his nephews. Sadly, this is/are THE issue(s) of his reign so I put the finished book down, still dissatisfied.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews