Decent books about the Wars of the Roses? Got myself The End

File: LEMONCAKES.jpg (11KB, 300x206px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x206px

>>9911116
>Decent books about the Wars of the Roses?

>>9911129
You got me, I became interested after aSoIaF. In my defence, during my education the whole thing was more or less described as "another time England fucked itself up", knowing nothing about it was encouraged.

>>9911155
Mmhm.

Well, I don't know have any recommendations for you. Just a comment that the history of Europe would be very interesting and probs very different if the Wars of the Roses didn't result in a unified England with a strong monarchy.

Also, this is pretty fascinating:

>The rules of military engagement changed as civil war succeeded overseas campaigns. It was customary for the heavy cavalry to fight entirely on foot.[61] In several cases, noblemen dismounted and fought among the common foot-soldiers, to inspire them and to dispel the notion that in the case of defeat they might be ransomed while the common soldiers, being of little value, faced death. It was often claimed, however, that the nobles faced greater risks than the ordinary soldiers as there was little incentive for anyone to take prisoner any high-ranking noble during or immediately after a battle. During the Hundred Years' War against France, a captured noble would be able to ransom himself for a large sum, but in the Wars of the Roses, a captured noble who belonged to a defeated faction had a high chance of being executed as a traitor. For example, forty-two captured knights were executed after the Battle of Towton.[62] The Burgundian observer Philippe de Commines, who met Edward IV in 1470, reported:

>King Edward told me in all the battles which he had won, as soon as he had gained victory, he mounted his horse and shouted to his men that they must spare the common soldiers and kill the lords, of whom none or few escaped.[51]