What are some good books about the English Civil War, particularly

bump I want to know too

however I'm guessing most books will just be liberal/communist/jewish propaganda saying "KING BAD" again and again for hundreds of pages

>>9801329
>>9801401

Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay's "History of England" will serve you both well, it picks off in that exact time period, after a brief introduction on England from Roman times. The book finishes with the deaths of James II and William. In terms of prose quality, it is the best book I've ever read.

Do not buy the abridged version on amazon though, you'll want to procure a set off of eBay for example.

>>9801401
Non-fiction is pretty neutral honestly, especially recent work

>not recommending Hume's history
OP, also read On Heroes and Hero Worship's chapter on Cromwell.

>>9801980
Lol.

>>9801977
This might be a stupid question, but are older histories like the one you mention, and others like Gibbon's on Rome, worth reading if you're chiefly concerned with historical accuracy over stylish prose?

>>9801986
What's the matter, scared you might like it?

>>9802018
Stop eating from the trashcan.

>>9802001

Gibbon isn't a work of history as we consider it today, just read a few chapters to see. It's full of his snarky opinions on all sorts of rando shit. It really shines where he attacks Christianity for ruining Rome. Definitely worth reading, but not if you're an uneducated pleb who won't be able to tell when he's talking out of his ass, which is almost the entire enormous work.

>>9801977

I guess it depends on the subject. Gibbon writes about events over two thousand years passed, Macaulay writes of events less than two centuries old. Macaulay's history was one of the best selling books of the 19th century, in America and Britain, and widely praised as having superceded all previous histories, including Humes, in quality of prose and accuracy of content. It was, at the end of the 19th, still the predominant text on the matter; I would argue our understanding of recent history, that is the 2nd millennium after Christ, hasn't improved much as a result of developments in the 20th, let alone the 21st.

Furthermore, without sounding conspiratorial, it offers insights into an age from the perspective of a much more quiet time. There weren't so many opposing ideological forces as in recent years, forces which leave nothing unmoved and untouched; that's not to say there aren't biases, but if there are, you can easily make them out, and they are almost always Western leaning.

>>9802123
>>9802124
Thanks guys.

Paradise Lost