What do you think?
Rate this book
A Great and Glorious Adventure: A Military History of the Hundred Years War
The Hundred Years War was fought between 1337 and 1453 over English claims to both the throne of France by right of inheritance and large parts of the country that had been at one time Norman or, later, English. The fighting ebbed and flowed, but despite their superior tactics and great victories at Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt, the English could never hope to secure their claims in perpetuity: France was wealthier and far more populous, and while the English won the battles, they could not hope to hold forever the lands they conquered.
The real and abiding significance of the war lies in the fact that, at its end, the English had become English, as opposed to Anglo-French, and France too had set out on the road to nationhood. (Both countries would subsequently become the very best of enemies.) The war also sparked a real revolution in the English way of waging war, with increasing professionalism and the use of technology to make up for lack of numbers - factors which remain relevant throughout the subsequent history of the English, and then the British, army and which are still critical to it today.
Military historian Gordon Corrigan's new history of these epochal events is brisk, combative and refreshingly straightforward, and the great kings, men and battles of the period receive the full attention and reassessment they deserve.
The real and abiding significance of the war lies in the fact that, at its end, the English had become English, as opposed to Anglo-French, and France too had set out on the road to nationhood. (Both countries would subsequently become the very best of enemies.) The war also sparked a real revolution in the English way of waging war, with increasing professionalism and the use of technology to make up for lack of numbers - factors which remain relevant throughout the subsequent history of the English, and then the British, army and which are still critical to it today.
Military historian Gordon Corrigan's new history of these epochal events is brisk, combative and refreshingly straightforward, and the great kings, men and battles of the period receive the full attention and reassessment they deserve.
213 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 1, 2013
7 people are currently reading
562 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
November 3, 2017
This was an excellent overview of the Hundred Years War, written by veteran military historian Gordon Corrigan. Focusing on the English side of the war, Corrigan takes you from the foundations of the English claim to the French throne, and all the way to the final abandonment of the English possessions in the face of a reformed, and revitalised, French military seeking just a bit of payback.
As he crams slightly over a century of information in a little under three hundred pages, he necessarily skimps on going too deep into detail. However the narrative does not lack substance, and his flow is excellent. Suffused with subtle, dry and biting wit his books are always a joy to read.
Corrigan shows why the English were so dominant, militarily, over their far larger and wealthier foes for so long. He breaks down the differences between the English professional style army, and the French feudal army, replete with knights in shining armor.
The English dependency on training, leadership, and mobility tended to see significantly smaller, yet far more agile and lethal, English armies route and massacre bloated, unweildy, and unnecessarily top heavy French forces.
The English, too, would rely upon the force multiplier of a superior weapons system to offset their chronic numerical disadvantages. In this case, the famous Longbow.
However, England simply lacked the resources necessary to fully subdue France. And though France was often riven with internal strife, and suffered from woeful leadership, they persevered and towards the last decades of the war, they finally learned from their mistakes of the past and began to copy the English military system.
An excellent primer on this longest of Medieval conflicts.
As he crams slightly over a century of information in a little under three hundred pages, he necessarily skimps on going too deep into detail. However the narrative does not lack substance, and his flow is excellent. Suffused with subtle, dry and biting wit his books are always a joy to read.
Corrigan shows why the English were so dominant, militarily, over their far larger and wealthier foes for so long. He breaks down the differences between the English professional style army, and the French feudal army, replete with knights in shining armor.
The English dependency on training, leadership, and mobility tended to see significantly smaller, yet far more agile and lethal, English armies route and massacre bloated, unweildy, and unnecessarily top heavy French forces.
The English, too, would rely upon the force multiplier of a superior weapons system to offset their chronic numerical disadvantages. In this case, the famous Longbow.
However, England simply lacked the resources necessary to fully subdue France. And though France was often riven with internal strife, and suffered from woeful leadership, they persevered and towards the last decades of the war, they finally learned from their mistakes of the past and began to copy the English military system.
An excellent primer on this longest of Medieval conflicts.
February 22, 2021
A balanced, well-written overview of the war.
The book has a certain pro-English bent; Corrigan writes of his “conviction that England’s demands on France were lawful and justified,” for example. Corrigan tells his story through a couple different famous personalities, most of them English. He does a great job describing medieval warfare, the immense financial cost of it, and how different it was in France and England, with the English king going to Parliament and the French using mercenaries and feudal levies.
Some more detailed maps would have helped. At one point Corrigan writes that the cause of the Black Death is still unknown today. The narrative does not cover the “birth of Renaissance England” until three pages in the epilogue. The narrative can be a bit breezy when it comes to anecdotes. It’s also strange that the cover art for the American edition depicts the Battle of Poitiers (the one in 732, that is)
An engaging, witty and entertaining work.
The book has a certain pro-English bent; Corrigan writes of his “conviction that England’s demands on France were lawful and justified,” for example. Corrigan tells his story through a couple different famous personalities, most of them English. He does a great job describing medieval warfare, the immense financial cost of it, and how different it was in France and England, with the English king going to Parliament and the French using mercenaries and feudal levies.
Some more detailed maps would have helped. At one point Corrigan writes that the cause of the Black Death is still unknown today. The narrative does not cover the “birth of Renaissance England” until three pages in the epilogue. The narrative can be a bit breezy when it comes to anecdotes. It’s also strange that the cover art for the American edition depicts the Battle of Poitiers (the one in 732, that is)
An engaging, witty and entertaining work.
December 28, 2019
It's a very good overview of the war, though later chapters speed things up too much. The author, Corrigan, is also a heavy Henry V fan, which, fine. He lets his excitement with the idea of English European holdings get the best of him sometimes, but that's more embarrassing than sinister. I'm going to read a bio of Jeanne d'Arc next, so we'll see what that has to say about her in comparison to Corrigan's rather dismissive view.
July 19, 2021
The opening lines of this popular history of the Hundred Years War tells us that England did not abandon her claim to the French crown until 1801, and then only because she supported the Bourbon restoration against the French revolutionaries. The book is crammed with interesting and revealing facts like this. It is short, and studiously avoids getting too deep into the details, but if you read and retain this book you probably know all you need to know about the war. There are also a number of useful maps, something that is becoming increasingly rare. You could not do better for a condensed history of the war.
September 3, 2014
A good overview of the 100 Years War interlaced with bits of dry humor, e.g. "Roger Mortimer, who is alleged to have killed de Montfort, cut off his head and genitals, and then sent the package to his own wife as a souvenir, would have been regarded as bad form even then," "Jean is known in French history as Jean le Bon - John the Good - the myth-makers having taken note of his undoubted personal courage and love of tournaments, while quietly ignoring that he was vicious, irrational, unjust, militarily incompetent and stupid (which, in the pantheon of French royalty, means that he was very stupid indeed)," and "Glyn Dwr was believed by many of his followers to have been a magician with the ability to make himself invisible. This is probably untrue." He is also not afraid to make judgements: "[King Henry V] died on 31 August 1422. The greatest Englishman that ever lived (at least in the opinion of this author)..." Recommended to anyone interested in the time period.
January 1, 2024
Too English.
January 20, 2015
The Hundred Years War between the French and the English took place over six hundred years ago. In every age since, it has been the subject of analysis and reconsideration from scholars to poets. Shakespeare found plenty of material for several of his plays.
Why? Because the period of that conflict was a turbulent one for the religious, the powerful, the chivalrous, and the common people. Corrigan, a British military man who writes military history, has been criticized for some imbalance in this book's analysis of English and French military campaigns. Here is his objective in his own words: "In this book I have tried to stick to what I know best and to look at the war from the military perspective....Historians must, of course, present both sides of the argument, but they do not have to be neutral. I hope I have treated the facts, as far as they can be determined with accuracy, as sacred, but I cannot hide my conviction that England's demands on France were lawful and justified, and, even where they were not, I feel pride in the achievements of Edward III, the Black Prince and Henry V."
I found this book's description of the battles one of the best. If it did not have all the immediacy of Bernard Cornwell's novels, that is more because of the flexibility that is accorded historical fiction that can invent where no facts are available. For those who want more context, I recommend Mortimer's Time-Travelers Guide to Medieval England. It goes into every aspect of culture and society. For those who are interested in larger trends and epochal consequences, I can recommend Tuchman's history of the 14th Century, A Distant Mirror.
A Great and Glorious Adventure is an enjoyable read for anyone interested in this period. And, Corrigan is persuasive in his conclusion: "The Hundred Years War has changed English society and attitudes profoundly. At its start, English nobles thought of themselves as Europeans; they had lands on both sides of the Channel, they spoke a form of French, they travelled to and fro, they married into cross-Channel families, and they owed religious allegiance to the Pope. By the end, they thought of themselves as English, they spoke English, they owned little outside England, and they were increasingly suspicious of any theological direction from abroad." He could have have devoted more analysis to the belief in chivalry that underlay the way battles were fought and how technology and the use of commoners as soldiers eventually eroded its practice and what it stood for.
Why? Because the period of that conflict was a turbulent one for the religious, the powerful, the chivalrous, and the common people. Corrigan, a British military man who writes military history, has been criticized for some imbalance in this book's analysis of English and French military campaigns. Here is his objective in his own words: "In this book I have tried to stick to what I know best and to look at the war from the military perspective....Historians must, of course, present both sides of the argument, but they do not have to be neutral. I hope I have treated the facts, as far as they can be determined with accuracy, as sacred, but I cannot hide my conviction that England's demands on France were lawful and justified, and, even where they were not, I feel pride in the achievements of Edward III, the Black Prince and Henry V."
I found this book's description of the battles one of the best. If it did not have all the immediacy of Bernard Cornwell's novels, that is more because of the flexibility that is accorded historical fiction that can invent where no facts are available. For those who want more context, I recommend Mortimer's Time-Travelers Guide to Medieval England. It goes into every aspect of culture and society. For those who are interested in larger trends and epochal consequences, I can recommend Tuchman's history of the 14th Century, A Distant Mirror.
A Great and Glorious Adventure is an enjoyable read for anyone interested in this period. And, Corrigan is persuasive in his conclusion: "The Hundred Years War has changed English society and attitudes profoundly. At its start, English nobles thought of themselves as Europeans; they had lands on both sides of the Channel, they spoke a form of French, they travelled to and fro, they married into cross-Channel families, and they owed religious allegiance to the Pope. By the end, they thought of themselves as English, they spoke English, they owned little outside England, and they were increasingly suspicious of any theological direction from abroad." He could have have devoted more analysis to the belief in chivalry that underlay the way battles were fought and how technology and the use of commoners as soldiers eventually eroded its practice and what it stood for.
November 16, 2016
Overall, Corrigan's book is a very entertaining and informative narrative and military history of the English people during the period of the Hundred Years War. It is not particularly academic nor is it analytical. Some may complain of the obvious English bias, but the author makes this bias very clear right from the outset. Those looking for a French perspective or for further examination of the French or continental experience should immediately see from the title (...Birth of Renaissance England) thst this is not their book. Furthermore, in the introduction, Corrigan makes clear his pro-English bias and his pride in his nation's history.
With that said, his obvious English bias is at times quaintly charming and at other times a bit overdone. Does the author need to label Henry V "the greatest Englishman who ever lived" or to blame inexcusable "Tudor laxity" for the loss of Calais to be successful? Probably not. A fifteenth century warrior-king being the greatest Englishman ever is not a particularly high bar to set by today's standards. And now that Calais has been firmly part of France for some five centuries should probably be a signal for the English to get over its loss. In addition to this there are some broad, probably indefensible claims strewn throughout the book that will probably stick out like sore thumbs to any reader capable of basic analysis. And, while probably an innocent typo, the mention of the "Spanish Armada of 1558" is an atrocious oversight. 1588. Anyone still smarting over the loss of Calais should know the year of one of England's greatest ever military successes.
Still, the examination of the development of English weapons and tactics is brilliant and insightful. The portraits of English monarchs and military leaders are entertaining and informative. The discussion of relevant historical events in Europe during this period go a long way toward contextualizing the successive conflicts examined by the author. It is definitely worth a read by anyone interested in a strong overview of the Hundred Years War.
With that said, his obvious English bias is at times quaintly charming and at other times a bit overdone. Does the author need to label Henry V "the greatest Englishman who ever lived" or to blame inexcusable "Tudor laxity" for the loss of Calais to be successful? Probably not. A fifteenth century warrior-king being the greatest Englishman ever is not a particularly high bar to set by today's standards. And now that Calais has been firmly part of France for some five centuries should probably be a signal for the English to get over its loss. In addition to this there are some broad, probably indefensible claims strewn throughout the book that will probably stick out like sore thumbs to any reader capable of basic analysis. And, while probably an innocent typo, the mention of the "Spanish Armada of 1558" is an atrocious oversight. 1588. Anyone still smarting over the loss of Calais should know the year of one of England's greatest ever military successes.
Still, the examination of the development of English weapons and tactics is brilliant and insightful. The portraits of English monarchs and military leaders are entertaining and informative. The discussion of relevant historical events in Europe during this period go a long way toward contextualizing the successive conflicts examined by the author. It is definitely worth a read by anyone interested in a strong overview of the Hundred Years War.
February 5, 2022
I hadn’t been reading anything about the Middle Ages for a long time, so my hand itself reached out to the book “A Great and Glorious Adventure: A Military History of the Hundred Years War” by Gordon Corrigan.
The author tells about the background and course of the Hundred Years War from the military science standpoint, since he is a former British soldier who graduated from a military academy. Additionally, Corrigan honestly warns in the preface that he is biased and wrote his book from the angle of an Englishman who considers the triumphant of Agincourt Henry V to be the greatest king.
I haven’t decided yet about the best monarch :)) However, I also have sympathy for English history and its figures. Therefore, the book was read quite organically, and the narrative didn’t manipulate the facts: it just acquired an emotional colouring.
It isn’t the first I’ve read books about this period of history, but I find something new each time. In this work, I learned more about the events of the end of the Hundred Years War, and I’m pretty satisfied.
The author tells about the background and course of the Hundred Years War from the military science standpoint, since he is a former British soldier who graduated from a military academy. Additionally, Corrigan honestly warns in the preface that he is biased and wrote his book from the angle of an Englishman who considers the triumphant of Agincourt Henry V to be the greatest king.
I haven’t decided yet about the best monarch :)) However, I also have sympathy for English history and its figures. Therefore, the book was read quite organically, and the narrative didn’t manipulate the facts: it just acquired an emotional colouring.
It isn’t the first I’ve read books about this period of history, but I find something new each time. In this work, I learned more about the events of the end of the Hundred Years War, and I’m pretty satisfied.
June 15, 2017
Corrigan presents us with an excellent and easily readable overview of the hundred years war with an emphasis on the military tactics used at various points along the way. His descriptions of battles like Crecy and Agincourt are about as good as one can get for such a small work covering such a vast span of time. However, the reconquest during the time of Joan of Arc are given barely more than a grudging overview.
This gets into my biggest complaint in the book. At times, the author's obvious English bias is charming and lends flavor. It is good at times for an author to be willing to take sides and offer up educated opinions. However, in certain cases like Joan and Henry V he takes this much too far and it detracts from the work rather than seasoning it.
Overall, this book is worth reading. It is good, not great, and is a great introductory work for those with a casual interest in this time period.
This gets into my biggest complaint in the book. At times, the author's obvious English bias is charming and lends flavor. It is good at times for an author to be willing to take sides and offer up educated opinions. However, in certain cases like Joan and Henry V he takes this much too far and it detracts from the work rather than seasoning it.
Overall, this book is worth reading. It is good, not great, and is a great introductory work for those with a casual interest in this time period.
November 8, 2014
I didn't really care for this very biased (pro-English) military history of the Hundred Years War. The author focuses on the military aspects of the conflict, going into great detail about troop movements and battlefield maneuvers, and failing to address the social and cultural fallout of the war. Moreover, the author is decidedly pro-English (to his credit, he admits this in the introduction) and manages to brush aside the plunder and slaughter the English armies performed on French soil (while also praising the soldiers as professionals) and ends the book by voicing a degree of regret that the English had not been able to retain their territories in France. Overall, I felt the bias got in the way of a good story and left me feeling a lot of sympathy for the French.
November 8, 2019
A very thoroughly researched book on the war. It is objective to a degree considering the authors background. He gives it a new perspective on the military and political sides of both.
June 19, 2021
Very well written from the English account of the 100 Years War. Though the title seemed to be a tongue in cheek claim to describe the horrendous account of warfare suffered by both sides with note of brutality, rape and looting that accompanied campaigns waged by the various land holders who financed these excursions.
The author is a former Gurkha Rifles Officer and a military history expert. Had he been an academic, he might have also written a companion written from the French account. However, this is to be expected as it is written in English. French authors write from French perspectives.
Also well written is the author's explanation of how warfare by England paved the way for a professional army that was to come in the future. New tactics, technologies and social changes led armies to leave the pressed men supplementing expensive knights and their retinue who filled in as fodder during battles. Experience was previosly gained by surviving battles by fighting over the shoulders of the man in front who was busy being killed.
These poor were replaced by professional men at arms and eventually better formation strategy that evolved to formation of Line Regiments.
The period of history also illustrates the overwhelming barbarity, cruelty and hard existence man faced day to day in battles as in daily life under the disdain thier rulers had for the people.
War is neither great nor glorious but campaigns have always appealed to mans lust for adventure.
The author is a former Gurkha Rifles Officer and a military history expert. Had he been an academic, he might have also written a companion written from the French account. However, this is to be expected as it is written in English. French authors write from French perspectives.
Also well written is the author's explanation of how warfare by England paved the way for a professional army that was to come in the future. New tactics, technologies and social changes led armies to leave the pressed men supplementing expensive knights and their retinue who filled in as fodder during battles. Experience was previosly gained by surviving battles by fighting over the shoulders of the man in front who was busy being killed.
These poor were replaced by professional men at arms and eventually better formation strategy that evolved to formation of Line Regiments.
The period of history also illustrates the overwhelming barbarity, cruelty and hard existence man faced day to day in battles as in daily life under the disdain thier rulers had for the people.
War is neither great nor glorious but campaigns have always appealed to mans lust for adventure.
August 7, 2025
This is very enjoyable overview of the 100 years war, not overly technical nor dragged down by endless tactical descriptions of battles from over 600 years ago (there's a touch of that, but not as much as you would guess for a book specifically covering war). Corrigan is a classic English professor/writer type, prideful about his country and certain Henry V was one of Britain's greatest men -- a veritable GOAT.
This cemented a lot of the knowledge I've been gathering about this period over last year or so. I didn't, however, take notes as I read it, and neither did I "annotate" (dog-ear a bunch of pages to go over while I was writing later). So I'll have to leave it with a tepidly brief review: I enjoyed it. If you have any interest in the 100 Years War or medieval England or France, you may enjoy it too.
This cemented a lot of the knowledge I've been gathering about this period over last year or so. I didn't, however, take notes as I read it, and neither did I "annotate" (dog-ear a bunch of pages to go over while I was writing later). So I'll have to leave it with a tepidly brief review: I enjoyed it. If you have any interest in the 100 Years War or medieval England or France, you may enjoy it too.
June 15, 2017
Detailed and somewhat one sided view of the Hundred Years War. Gordon Corrigan pens an interesting accounting of the life and customs during that conflict. He delves into the birth of the of the developing British army and at times is able to convey his information in an entertaining manner. Witty, at times sarcastic, Corrigan is adamantly pro-English. He writes a comprehensive history that is entertaining and informative with an almost gossipy feel. I enjoyed the book for his wit, but disliked his ethnocentric jingoism. While the hundred year war ended many years ago, Corrigan's snarky comments, "France as a nation has never liked us, and does not now. The feeling is mutual..." colors an otherwise interesting and scholarly work. I was given a copy of this book for an honest review.
September 23, 2021
Jesus christ this era of history and warfare was boring and meaningless. In October of 1482, Charles the IX, second cousin of William the Knave, marched 4,000 troops to the hillock of Derbyshire and confronted 6,000 men led by Luis XXII, son of Luis XXI, and they did battle with long bow and...and...and this fucking nonsense goes on for over a 100 years.
JFC. I retained nothing. The British and French fucked with each other for a while and then because no one could meaningfully hold the territory they momentarily captured in a battle, would go back to their respective areas. All it led to was long lasting animosity between their ancestors. Seriously, fuck this time period and it's petty, petty squabbles.
JFC. I retained nothing. The British and French fucked with each other for a while and then because no one could meaningfully hold the territory they momentarily captured in a battle, would go back to their respective areas. All it led to was long lasting animosity between their ancestors. Seriously, fuck this time period and it's petty, petty squabbles.
January 19, 2023
Pros: Much information about the 100 Years War, yes. Learned plenty.
Cons: Like many a history book, the “view from the top” perspective always seems to bore me. I’d rather hear stories from average folks who lived during the historical period in question, as they are more relatable. Sadly, average folks back then didn’t much read, write, or even Tweet.
Cons: Like many a history book, the “view from the top” perspective always seems to bore me. I’d rather hear stories from average folks who lived during the historical period in question, as they are more relatable. Sadly, average folks back then didn’t much read, write, or even Tweet.
May 29, 2025
This is an accessible account of the Hundred Years' War, largely from the English perspective, focusing mainly on the military aspects, with interesting comparisons with modern warfare, challenges and leadership.
June 30, 2021
I gave up early on this book, as it just wasn't interesting to me.
April 29, 2023
Very biased towards the English (written by an English author). All the French victories are glossed over or outright dismissed. Not so much a history book as a piece of propaganda.
September 22, 2023
Nearly a 5 star read. Tells you everything you need to know about the period in under 300 pages. Some details are breezed by that would have been better fleshed out so not quite perfect.
July 5, 2025
Enjoyable military history of the Hundred Years War.
July 20, 2017
Mr Corrigan writes well, in a continuous narrative full of interesting notes and details.
A joy to read.
A joy to read.
June 12, 2021
Gordon Corrigan is a gem, but the narrative drags at times. One chapter in particular, about the evolution of the composition of the British military, is especially dull. There are also occasional slights toward religion. Nonetheless, the book is both enlightening and entertaining.
February 19, 2017
And now I know how to win a battle. If I'm in late medieval France, leading an army of English archers and know anything about fighting. But as long as I meet all that, I'd be good.
Anyhow, it was extremely interesting to learn how the battles of Agincourt, Poitiers and Crecy were actually fought on a tactical level and how forces were deployed. And how the English development of a professional, disciplined army allowed them to dominate the battlefields against larger French armies.
Anyhow, it was extremely interesting to learn how the battles of Agincourt, Poitiers and Crecy were actually fought on a tactical level and how forces were deployed. And how the English development of a professional, disciplined army allowed them to dominate the battlefields against larger French armies.
August 26, 2015
Corrigan is an excellent writer. He manages to make a complex theme, like the Hundred Year War, and makes it easy and enjoyable to read. He mixes a clever and dry humor with the basic facts that keeps the reader focused. He does not become bogged down in the details, though it is in the details that his book loses is flavor.
Corrigan also acknowledges a strong pro-English bias. This includes aggrandizing the British heroes and belittling the French heroes. A case in point is Bertrand du Guesclin, the French marshal. With very little background on the man, Corrigan largely dismisses him as a knight without any real tactical skill with a penchant for being captured and ransomed back at increasing cost. Meanwhile, he declares Henry V to be the greatest king in English history. It is interesting to speculate what would have happened if Henry V had lived longer to consolidate his military gains. Nevertheless, he died almost the apogee when he claimed half of France. English France collapsed very shortly after his death.
Despite all of his writing skills, Corrigan glosses over the collapse with very little to say except that a lack of leadership among the English, and support from home, contributed to the collapse. There is really nothing about the French victory. There is also very little about the wars in Brittany. Apart from the grand marches through France, much of the Hundred Years War was focused in this duchy with France and England supporting rival families. Of course, the partisan warfare in Brittany does not lend itself to the glorious adventures of Edward III, Henry V, and the Black Prince. Then again, neither does the French resurgence.
Overall, the book is entertaining history. Everyone can easily understand his writing style. He is clear and concise. However, he leaves a lot out of the narrative. He does not adequately explain why France was so weak; although he drops hints at factionalism and decentralization - both of which disappeared because the English slaughtered the French nobility in three glorious battles.
Corrigan also acknowledges a strong pro-English bias. This includes aggrandizing the British heroes and belittling the French heroes. A case in point is Bertrand du Guesclin, the French marshal. With very little background on the man, Corrigan largely dismisses him as a knight without any real tactical skill with a penchant for being captured and ransomed back at increasing cost. Meanwhile, he declares Henry V to be the greatest king in English history. It is interesting to speculate what would have happened if Henry V had lived longer to consolidate his military gains. Nevertheless, he died almost the apogee when he claimed half of France. English France collapsed very shortly after his death.
Despite all of his writing skills, Corrigan glosses over the collapse with very little to say except that a lack of leadership among the English, and support from home, contributed to the collapse. There is really nothing about the French victory. There is also very little about the wars in Brittany. Apart from the grand marches through France, much of the Hundred Years War was focused in this duchy with France and England supporting rival families. Of course, the partisan warfare in Brittany does not lend itself to the glorious adventures of Edward III, Henry V, and the Black Prince. Then again, neither does the French resurgence.
Overall, the book is entertaining history. Everyone can easily understand his writing style. He is clear and concise. However, he leaves a lot out of the narrative. He does not adequately explain why France was so weak; although he drops hints at factionalism and decentralization - both of which disappeared because the English slaughtered the French nobility in three glorious battles.
February 15, 2017
Very detailed and concise, but definitely one- sided on the English perspective. I was happy to find a book that seemed to help bridge the gap between the Plantagenet era and the end of the Hundred Years War. I disagree with some of the author's opinions, particularly that I don't think being more interested in peace than war makes a king less " kingly," and especially that the war was a noble cause (particularly after he stated that the English claim to the French crown was "ridiculous," which I wholeheartedly agree with). The English were after French territory and resources and of course power, I don't see anything particularly noble or just about that type of endeavor. I would like now to find a book about the Hundred Years War from the perspective of the French.
June 2, 2015
“There are many men who cry for war without knowing what war amounts to. “ Geoffrey Chaucer
I was gifted this book by the publisher for an honest review.
Gordon Corrigan has the credentials to write an excellent military history of the Hundred Years War and I found his scholarship and insight very valuable in this telling.
I have read many accounts of this time period but nothing that encompasses it all and I think that is why this would be my go to book on the period.
He knows the tactics of the battle and writes in an easily understood language for those that have little military training. I feel I have a better understanding of what each commander was feeling and why they used the tactics they did.
Some reviewers have put him down as a biased author, but I didn’t find that to be true. He gave Joan of Arc her due and when an English warrior screwed up, we heard about that also. Perhaps it’s because when the English won, they won big like in Agincourt or Crecy.
His honesty about the animosity between the French and English to this day was refreshing and as an American helped me to understand it in today’s perspective.
I learned a great deal about the Hundred Years War from a different perspective than I was used to and I recommend this book to anyone interested in military tactics and the period itself.
I was gifted this book by the publisher for an honest review.
Gordon Corrigan has the credentials to write an excellent military history of the Hundred Years War and I found his scholarship and insight very valuable in this telling.
I have read many accounts of this time period but nothing that encompasses it all and I think that is why this would be my go to book on the period.
He knows the tactics of the battle and writes in an easily understood language for those that have little military training. I feel I have a better understanding of what each commander was feeling and why they used the tactics they did.
Some reviewers have put him down as a biased author, but I didn’t find that to be true. He gave Joan of Arc her due and when an English warrior screwed up, we heard about that also. Perhaps it’s because when the English won, they won big like in Agincourt or Crecy.
His honesty about the animosity between the French and English to this day was refreshing and as an American helped me to understand it in today’s perspective.
I learned a great deal about the Hundred Years War from a different perspective than I was used to and I recommend this book to anyone interested in military tactics and the period itself.
March 1, 2015
A Great and Glorious Adventure was a sometimes fascinating read on the Hundred Years war.
The opening chapters fill readers in on British History from William the Conqueror to Edward III. However, most of the book focuses on the reigns of Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV, and Henry V. (The author has his favorites.)
I would say a love for British history is an absolute must for this one. That isn't to say that every history lover will love this one. Yes, it's about history, but it's more military history, war, and battles. (So much detail is given for so many different battles and/or conflicts.) So the book is about England's ongoing conflicts with France, Scotland, and Wales over several centuries. Readers also learn a little bit about the Black Death. (But only a little bit).
It is sometimes fascinating. I won't lie. There were chapters I enjoyed. But it is sometimes less than fascinating. There were chapters I just didn't enjoy all that much.
If you enjoy reading about the War of Roses, and would like a better, stronger foundation for understanding it, then this one would be worth reading.
The opening chapters fill readers in on British History from William the Conqueror to Edward III. However, most of the book focuses on the reigns of Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV, and Henry V. (The author has his favorites.)
I would say a love for British history is an absolute must for this one. That isn't to say that every history lover will love this one. Yes, it's about history, but it's more military history, war, and battles. (So much detail is given for so many different battles and/or conflicts.) So the book is about England's ongoing conflicts with France, Scotland, and Wales over several centuries. Readers also learn a little bit about the Black Death. (But only a little bit).
It is sometimes fascinating. I won't lie. There were chapters I enjoyed. But it is sometimes less than fascinating. There were chapters I just didn't enjoy all that much.
If you enjoy reading about the War of Roses, and would like a better, stronger foundation for understanding it, then this one would be worth reading.
January 31, 2017
This was very interesting. The author is an excellent writer, and the book is definitely entertaining. The footnotes in particular often include very witty asides. He also gives very realistic-sounding assessments of the size of armies involved.
However, the author also has a very strong pro-English bias, and there's even a sense of bitterness that the 100 years war didn't work out better for the lads who were "only trying to get what was rightfully theirs." According to this book, you'd almost think the English never actually lost a battle. I also found him very dismissive of Joan of Arc. He's probably right about her lack of military ability, but you still can't really dismiss her effect on the morale of the soldiers. Mary Tudor only ever gets an aside, but I don't think he's forgiven her (400+ years later) for finally losing Calais.
However, the author also has a very strong pro-English bias, and there's even a sense of bitterness that the 100 years war didn't work out better for the lads who were "only trying to get what was rightfully theirs." According to this book, you'd almost think the English never actually lost a battle. I also found him very dismissive of Joan of Arc. He's probably right about her lack of military ability, but you still can't really dismiss her effect on the morale of the soldiers. Mary Tudor only ever gets an aside, but I don't think he's forgiven her (400+ years later) for finally losing Calais.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews