Henry IV: usurper or saviour? - Rated 
For many of us, Henry IV is the king who deposed Richard II, fathered Henry V and features in three of Shakespeare's historical plays. He reigned as King of England from 1399 to 1413 and while the significant events of his reign are documented in history, the man himself largely remains in the shadows.
In this book, Ian Mortimer sets out to bring Henry IV out of the shadows by providing both context and perspective for his actions. Mortimer's research and energetic writing do shed light, but it is not quite enough to infuse Henry IV with personality and life. The people around Henry IV largely remain in the shadows and it is their perspectives that would enable us to get a clearer picture of the man who was the king.
Ian Mortimer has provided comprehensive notes and a wealth of information in his select bibliography. This book is a wonderful starting point for those who want to know more about the life and times of Henry IV. I hope that at some stage someone will write a book that will be able to shed more life on the man himself.
Was Henry IV a usurper or a saviour? Ian Mortimer has a view, and while I largely agree with him I'm not entirely convinced. Yet.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
Recommended! - Rated 
The medieval period has a reputation for being as dark as the age that preceded it, so I was almost reluctant to read this book, but I'm glad I made the effort to pick it up. This is Shakespeare's king, but not as countless actors have played him. Ian Mortimer uses biography as a powerful tool to investigate the relationship between Richard (Henry's predecessor) and Henry - from Henry's point of view. Henry's taking the throne is often taken as the root of the Wars of the Roses, and the author shows how Richard changed his mind about his heir several times. Having become king, Henry had to sweep away almost a century of English royal practices to ensure he had a hereditary right to the throne, and although Richard did indeed make the Yorkists the heirs to the throne, they themselves initially gave in to Henry. This casts a long shadow over the rest of 15th-century history. Mortimer's great strength is that he does not rehash accepted views but has embarked on a thorough re-evaluation of the information contained within the contemporary evidence, and a logical examination of its contradictions and implication. This is not revisionism for the sake of it, but an essential analysis of the available evidence. This might sound like medieval political history at its driest: not in this book. The full horror of the tyranny of Richard II's final years in power contrasts with the chivalric fervour of Henry's early life. As the sole grandson of Edward III and the first duke of Lancaster, he was one of the foremost warriors of the 14th century, and possibly the greatest tournament fighter the English royal family ever produced. The description of the battle of Shrewbury gives a real insider's view of what it was like to be involved in one of these battles. Bloody conflict, subtle political manoeuvring and up-to-date historical analysis - this book has it all.
A scholarly study that does not meet its self-set goals, very boring to read - Rated 
I had quite enjoyed Ian Mortimer two previous books "The Greatest
Traitor: The Life of Sir Roger Mortimer, Ruler of England 1327-1330" and "The Perfect King: The Life of Edward III, Father of the English Nation". However, this book comes kind of a disappointment as it the author does not achieve his self-set goals.
King Henry IV comes with quite a lot of baggage: the usurper king and the arch-villain of Shakespeare, and eclipsed by his hero-son Henry V.
Ian Mortimer sets out to rectify this traditional picture of Henry IV and wants to get to personality of the King. Getting to the personality of late-medieval personalities is quite difficult to achieve as one is very much stuck with the actions and has less on thoughts. Giving it a try is quite recommendable but I feel that in the end Ian Mortimer has given his reader actually not much more than a deduction from actions and mostly describe actually the doings of the King. One does not feel really closer of the thoughts. Otherwise the book it is a bit too much of a whitewash of Henry IV. In the first part Ian Mortimer tries to build up a picture of Henry as the heir presumptive of Richard II, a well educated, widely travelled, religious royal prince of international standing, a hero of tournaments. What a contrast to the spoilt and in-effective Richard II!! Getting rid of this ruler was for Henry first of all a matter of his own survival, understandable that he did so.
Being ineffective as a ruler however does not made the legitimate king an unlawful king and would give anybody a right to remove him, at least according to the values of the time. Forcing the monarch to abdicate and than organizing his own election still does not really get rid of the usurpation reproach. In this aspect however Ian Mortimer really tries hard to white-wash Henry IV.
Henry's reign and rule was not a glorious one and much of the in-effectiveness of Richard II was repeated by him. Ian Mortimer is therefore quite critical of his reign, especially with regards to the first few years when Henry thought he could run England like he did run the Duchy of Lancaster.
This book is a very tiring read, heavy, no great flow, sometimes bogged down with petty details and it is really a struggle to get through. So in the end I did not find it particularly convincing or at least pleasant to read. I was really glad when I had finished it. There were quite a lot of moments when I thought I just drop it. Definitely not a must read.
|
