This is a blow by blow account of a the two year period between the the calling by Charles I of what would come to be known as the "Long Parliament " in 1640 and Charles's flight from London some two years later. Charles was faced with rebellion by the Scottish nobility (the covenanters) who took issue with his attempts to foist bishops and the Common Book of Prayer on him. He had also run out of money and Parliament was one of the few ways in which he could secure the funds the fight the Scots. His decision (effectively foisted on him by a group of reformist peers known as the Petitioners or the Junto) started the two year process in which he saw his powers stripped from him, the end of the war with the Scots (on fully their terms) and the execution of his favourite minister Lord Strafford.

While presented as a work of popular fiction, this is very far from being the ideal introduction to the beginnings of the English Civil War. There is very little in the way of background or context - the reader is plunged into the world of 1639 - and there only a few, very short attempts at biographies of the major players. Instead this is really aimed at presenting other academics and keen students of the period with a new analysis of the civil war which differs from the interpretations presented by the Whigs (part of England's fulfilling of its destiny as a Parliamentary democracy), Marxists (a bourgeois revolution) and the revisionists (it was fundamentally about religion). As is often the case with academics presenting a thesis, this makes the book often repetetive with Adams repeating his points on every occasion that there is a new fact to support them.

As my knowledge of the period is very limited, I did find the book frustrating for that reason. When Adams is describing events he is very good - the trial and execution of Strafford is really well done. He's also pretty good at describing the motivations of the protaganists. However there are parts which are tedious - for example, to make a point he has to list the membership of this or that committee of the Commons, repeating more or ess the same list of names he has listed a few pages earlier in relation to another committee. Some key points aren't explained very well. The denoument arises when Charles issues a call for all members of the Commons and Lords to come to Westminster so that the conservatives can overwhelm the reformists with their superior numbers. As a result the Junto rush through legislation before they can arrive. The reader is left wondering why Charles did not use this trick at any time in the past two years and no explanation is forthcoming.

A quick word about the presentation - superb. Lots of really well-produced plates, well done to the publishers.

7/10 ( )

I am no expert on the English Civil War, but I do understand that this book challenges the traditional schools of thought on it - that it was a change wrought by the increasingly powerful bourgeoisie in the commons, or indeed a result of popular pressure on the streets, or that it was primarily a religious conflict.
Adamson argues that while these factors existed, the key years of the early 1640s (this book is very focused in scope and does not discuss the actual course of the Civil War at all) the struggle was between a group of nobles and their supporters and the king. It was about who had power in the political system.
The book is persuasive, and while thick with detail, avoids getting bogged down in it and losing the bigger picture. I found the accounts of the events and personalities fascinating; not least the fact that the schoolbook picture of Charles I as a bad (or at least incompetent) king is hard to avoid after reading this account as well.
This is an extensive and academic work in scope and tone, but very rewarding. It has also encouraged me to seek out more books on the period and extend my knowledge of it. ( )