Phil Bradford’s The Worst Medieval Monarchs is a fascinating read! Bradford explores five of the worst monarchs. Did history treat them fairly and are they really as bad as we think they are? If you love reading about royalty, this book is for you! I voluntarily read and reviewed a complimentary copy of this well-written, well-researched book.

Diving into "The Worst Medieval Monarchs" by Phil Bradford, I found myself on a surprisingly hilarious historical journey, despite the grim subject matter. Bradford delivers a concise yet engaging exploration of some of England's most notoriously ineffective rulers.

What really adds flavour to this historical tour is Bradford's take on the outlandish punishments and political follies of the era. It's one thing to read about the missteps of medieval kings; it's another entirely to see their blunders and the often absurd consequences laid out with such aplomb. Bradford's book is a delightful blend of historical rigour and tongue-in-cheek commentary, making it a standout read for both history buffs and casual readers alike.

Whilst the book is also educational, detailing the reigns of kings like Richard II and Edward II, it’s Bradford’s light-hearted narrative style that keeps the pages turning. You'll find yourself chuckling at the bizarre world of medieval politics and wondering how some of these monarchs ever made it to the throne.

In summary, "The Worst Medieval Monarchs" offers a unique and amusing perspective on a period often portrayed as dreary and severe. Bradford’s ability to mix solid historical research with a humorous tone makes for a refreshing and enjoyable read. For someone who loves all things monarchy, this foray into a historical narrative was both entertaining and enlightening.

This review is based o a complimentary copy from the publisher, Provided through NetGalley. All opinions are my own.

An in depth and thoroughly researched book, I feel I got to know each monarch in turn and the turning points of their rule which led to them becoming 'the worst monarchs'.

This was an informative read. As someone who enjoys historical informations and such, this was like a craving satisfied.

Source for lively discussion and airing of prejudices. Worth taking a vote before and after reading it.

Stephen, John, Edward II, Richard II, and Richard III are often deemed England's worst medieval kings due to civil war, popular unrest, or the loss of their thrones. Their reputations are marred by allegations of tyranny and murder. This book explores their dramatic lives and their evolving reputations through history. Were these kings really as bad as they've been made out to be?

This book is a thorough and intriguing analysis of why the reigns of these five kings were ultimately unsuccessful. Were these men the product of circumstances, or their own personal failings? The analysis is fair, though I don't completely agree with the author's final verdict. It's worth a read so you can come to your own conclusions.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

Medieval England - a time of conflict & civil war, where the throne, usually passed from father to son, could be usurped by the strong & ruthless. Personally I tend to get a bit mixed up between all the Henrys & Edwards & it's only those who have caught the public imagination, i.e. Richard I (through his fictional links with Robin Hood) who stand out. This book looks at five monarchs who, viewed against the expectations of Kings at the time, were the eras greatest failures: Stephen battled his cousin Matilda for the throne & yet her son succeeded him, John is synonymous with being a duplicitous throne stealer, Edward II is viewed as weak, Richard II as a bit of a spoilt brat, whilst Richard III can never shake the accusations of the murders of his two young nephews.

This book looks at the historical evidence for the truth behind the rumours & looks at how their reputations evolved following their deaths. The author puts a slightly different spin on things as they briefly review the changing schools of thought about each King throughout the ages, & also looks at how they have been portrayed in plays, films, fiction books, etc. I thought it was an interesting & informative read, although it was a little dry to read in places.

My thanks to NetGalley & publishers, Pen & Sword History, for the opportunity to read an ARC.

Take a walk through some of the monarchs in Britain, who have had the distinction of being the worst in the long line of rulers.
Phil Bradford walks through the different monarchs, how they are remembered through the ages, and the final verdict of their overall reigns. The rulers he chose were well researched and their history and their final place in the annuls of time.

Great read! I enjoyed this one!

Book review. “The worst medieval monarchs” by Phil Bradford.

I’d like to thank NetGalley and Pen&Sword for giving me the opportunity to read and review this book.

It is interesting how sometimes we like to romanticize the past and see the glory and glitter, forgetting that there are two sides of everything. Going from the opposite, Phil Bradford takes a look at five medieval (English) monarchs to understand why they were the worst and how this reputation shaped over times.

What is the criteria of successful or failed reign? What are the components for it to be judged upon? What is the origin of the monarch reputation?
All these questions could be answered based on - unsurprisingly - contemporary documents, such as coronation oaths, ordinances, chronicles, etc. Bias, motivation, authenticity of the documents have to be taken into account as well.
The items considered to “judge” a medieval monarch were:
- work with advisors, parliament, “body-politic”
- relationship with the Church
- Keeping peace in the realm
Re-assertion of the criteria came with Reformation and subsequent social changes of further ages and reigns. Aligning with current times goals, looking for examples and parallels, reaching objectivity and, even involuntary, adhering to current viewpoints and social requests makes the process of re-assertion continuously changeable.
With popular culture dramatization and fictionalization of rulers and their vices takes a turn to wide spread of half-truths and biased interpretations.
All of the above creates a vivid but not necessarily an objective picture of the medieval monarch. Vivid and well turned phrase could label a person for posterity.
Each reviewed monarch had such a phrase:
Stephen - when Christ and his Saints slept
John - John, John, bad king John, shamed the throne he sat on
Edward II - Marlowe play “Edward II” conveys king’s obsession with Gaveston
Richard II - within the hollow crown... keeps Death his court
Richard III - a horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!

Book is easy to read, peppered with references, and provides extensive research into all aspects that formed monarch’s reputation.
Interesting and entertaining read, tracing changes in perception of these monarchs over the centuries.

Stephen. John. Edward II. Richard II. Richard III. These five are widely viewed as the worst of England’s medieval kings. Certainly, their reigns were not success stories. Two of these kings lost their thrones, one only avoided doing so by dying, another was killed in battle, and the remaining one had to leave his crown to his opponent. All have been seen as incompetent, their reigns blighted by civil war and conflict. They tore the realm apart, failing in the basic duty of a king to ensure peace and justice. For that, all of them paid a heavy price. As well as incompetence, some also have reputations for cruelty and villainy, More than one has been portrayed as a tyrant. The murder of family members and arbitrary executions stain their reputations. All five reigns ended in failure. As a result, the kings have been seen as failures themselves, the worst examples of medieval English kingship. They lost their reputations as well as their crowns.

Yet were these five really the worst men to wear the crown of England in the Middle Ages? Or has history treated them unfairly? This book looks at the stories of their lives and reigns, all of which were dramatic and often unpredictable. It then examines how they have been seen since their deaths, the ways their reputations have been shaped across the centuries. The standards of their own age were different to our own. How these kings have been judged has changed over time, sometimes dramatically. Fiction, from Shakespeare’s plays to modern films, has also played its part in creating the modern picture. Many things have created, over a long period, the negative reputations of these five. Today, they have come to number among the worst kings of English history. Is this fair, or should they be redeemed?

That is the question this book sets out to answer.

The history of the monarchy in England (and this book is focused on England) features a range of names familiar to us from school, and taught to us as either good or bad rulers. Little focus is given to why those deemed as 'bad' are perceived to be that way or how historical retelling has shaped our view and this book tries to rebalance that with a look at the reigns of five of those ruled 'bad' (Stephen, King John, Edward II, Richard II, Richard III).

It's an interesting premise and very well executed. Phil Bradford gives us a detailed background on medieval monarchy and how the perception of monarchy has changed through the ages which gives a good context for his more detailed discussions on the five kings. His research covers material from the time and throughout the centuries since and it's very interesting to see the development of the narratives. He doesn't just try to take away negative impressions of their reigns but instead tries to give them more balance.

This was a very interesting read and I found it fascinating. The author's writing style is very natural and he makes a lot of information easy to follow. Highly recommended to anyone with an interest in medieval history.

Thanks to NetGalley, Phil Bradford and Pen and Sword History for the copy in return for an honest review.

#TheWorstMedievalMonarchs #NetGalley

Great choices to relate precisely with the title. I agree with the author. Thanks go to the author and the publishers for the copy of this book for my review.
Truthfully I really don’t think it would be possible to pick any other monarchs (except perhaps Mary I) to fit the bill: lazy, disinterested, unmilitiristic, avaricious, a list to describe each ruined personality would run out of paper. I would have enjoyed reading more about the kings’ relationships and upbringing with this fathers. A few were reared to be clerks, religious, etc instead of rulers, and I think knowing more about their family relationships and connections, or about any evidence of reaction as they get closer to heir apparent would have been eye-opening.
Overall i did find the book easy to read, but a tad presumptive that most readers would have at least a basic understanding of these time periods. I know that if I hadn’t the knowledge base I would have been lost at times within each section.
Now if I could have a Best of Monarchs book that would make my year!

I love a good book that gives more than its title promises and in The Worst Mid Evil Monarchs how the rituals of coronation day came to be how the place the carnation happen became tradition and when they sovereign became king was also explained in the book or how it started and how it now is. The author does explain how any of these monarchs quality of reigns can be debated and often is he also tells us about the young lives of the king how they died who died in their bed who died on the battlefield and who was usurped and it all makes for one interesting book. I love things having to do with the rulers in the middle ages and so I just ate this book up from beginning to end. I love books about the middle ages especially nonfiction books it’s all I have read some really bad ones so to get a stellar read like this one was a real treat although they’re not proper biographies there’s enough there to give you a good idea of what kind of king he was and what kind of person he was if this sounds like something that’s interesting to you then you should definitely read this book it is one I highly recommend and one who any history lover would love to have in the library. Kudos to the author Phil Bradford for an excellent read, I also want to thank Pen and Sword history and Net Galley for my free arc copy please forgive any mistakes as I am blind and dictate my review.

Thank you NetGalley, Phil Bradford, and Pen & Sword for allowing me to read an advanced copy of The Worst Medieval Monarchs. I received an advanced reader copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

I wanted to read this book because of the chapter on Richard III. I have been finding him an interesting person as of late because opinions of him have changed so drastically over the years. I was also enthralled by the histories mentioned regarding each of the other prominent figures in this book. Phil Bradford did a great job presenting each monarch.

Quite a bit has been written regarding Tudor history, and one of the interesting aspects of the book was addressing the evolving nature of historian's understanding of the Tudor time period, along with how some of the understanding of this unique, and oft well-studied time tend to be based on preconceived misconceptions, presentism, or in some cases, due to Shakespeare's plays "supposedly" based off of historical events, but given Bard's plays tend to be after the fact, and on literature written without supporting archeological or documented sources.

Focusing on kings such as Stephen, and King Richard III, the intriguing quality to Phil Bradford's book is his attempts to balance each presentation with verifiable historical records, a brief overview of how the kings were perceived, and a look at the actual understanding of each king, with the example of how the finding, and excavation of King Richard III helped change historians and cultural understanding of what was then known of Richard III.

While I go more in-depth into the book in my blog post, the highlights of this book are its attention to balancing how to address history, and how history treats people and events, but more than anything questioning how much do people really understand the rich history of the Tudor period.

The book is well suited for those who are interested in Tudor history, as a reference source, but also as a challenge to how history and people are perceived by not only historians but in cultural light.

Thank you to Netgalley, and Pen&Sword for the opportunity to read, and review the book in exchange of my honest review.