Scan barcode
Reviews
The Greatest Traitor: The Life of Sir Roger Mortimer, Ruler of England 1327-1330 by Ian Mortimer
lilacashes's review against another edition
3.0
This book gives a pretty good impression of 14th century aristocratic England by following the life story of one extraordinary man. The author uses the book as a vehicle for sometimes very daring theses. The central thesis, that Roger Mortimer did not kill king Edward II as had been historical consensus for centuries, is introduced somewhat offhandedly and only substantiated in the last chapter. This makes seem much of the last third of the book seem pretty far out on a limb, but good evidence for it is given in the final chapter.
I cannot finish without one quote though, which shows the author's twisted understanding of love and view of women though: "There is no reason to doubt that Roger did love Isabella deeply, as shown by his blurted out threat to kill her if she returned to her husband in 1325."
Ian Mortimer writes engagingly and in deep detail about historical events and circumstances, but having read two of his books I don't think I need to read another one.
I cannot finish without one quote though, which shows the author's twisted understanding of love and view of women though: "There is no reason to doubt that Roger did love Isabella deeply, as shown by his blurted out threat to kill her if she returned to her husband in 1325."
Ian Mortimer writes engagingly and in deep detail about historical events and circumstances, but having read two of his books I don't think I need to read another one.
taisie22's review against another edition
5.0
Excellent biography and interesting theory about the death of Edward II
bristoni74's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars. Ian Mortimer is one of my favourite historians and writers. Roger Mortimer has always fascinated me as a leader, knight, Tower escapee, lover of Isabella "she-wolf", invader of England, ruler in Edward III's name when he was a minor and finally traitor. What a story! Ian Mortimer isn't an apologist for Roger - I thought he was very objective and fair in his assessment and even though he does provide solid reasons for why Roger may have made the decisions he did, he does acknowledge he was the greater traitor.
The theory in the book I found a little implausible (although he isn't the only historian to think so) is the survival of Edward II. Ian Mortimer provides a lot of evidence for his theory but I couldn't quite go along with it.
The theory in the book I found a little implausible (although he isn't the only historian to think so) is the survival of Edward II. Ian Mortimer provides a lot of evidence for his theory but I couldn't quite go along with it.
librarianonparade's review against another edition
5.0
Roger Mortimer has always been one of the more shadowy figures of medieval history, obscured by centuries of historical assumption and oversight and by his own determination to remain the power behind the throne, the figure in the shadows pulling the strings. And that's a shame, because in this excellent biography from Ian Mortimer, he comes across as a truly fascinating figure and quite a sympathetic one too - ironic for a man who quite probably earns the title of 'greatest traitor', who deposed a king, had a passionate affair with the queen, usurped the power of the Crown and ruled through the young Edward III as the true power in the land.
Roger Mortimer's greatest tragedy seems to be that he was not royal - if he'd had even the faintest shadow of a claim to the throne, one suspects he would have proved to be a very good king. He was honest and honourable, utterly loyal to the Crown until pushed too far by Edward II, a skilled tactician and warrior, a good administrator. He made an excellent servant to the Crown until he and many of the other nobles could no longer tolerate Edward II's tyranny, favouritism and mismanagement, and then he made a very very bad enemy.
And from that point on Mortimer's fate was set. The deposition of Edward II was popular, supported by nobles, commons and clergy, and Mortimer's actions to that point could be seen as entirely justified. But once Edward III was in place, Mortimer's actions increasingly became self-defensive, more about preserving his and Queen Isabella's position ruling in the young king's name, than about what was best for the country. And Edward III was only going to grow into his role and chafe against the rule of his mother and her lover.
Ian Mortimer (no relation, I'm sure!) is in my opinion one of the best writers of popular history out there. I have enjoyed every one of his books, and this is as well-written, interesting and engaging as the rest. I was particularly fascinated by his theory on the survival of Edward II, which he presents quite convincingly. Won me over, at any rate. If only all popular history was as enjoyable as this!
Roger Mortimer's greatest tragedy seems to be that he was not royal - if he'd had even the faintest shadow of a claim to the throne, one suspects he would have proved to be a very good king. He was honest and honourable, utterly loyal to the Crown until pushed too far by Edward II, a skilled tactician and warrior, a good administrator. He made an excellent servant to the Crown until he and many of the other nobles could no longer tolerate Edward II's tyranny, favouritism and mismanagement, and then he made a very very bad enemy.
And from that point on Mortimer's fate was set. The deposition of Edward II was popular, supported by nobles, commons and clergy, and Mortimer's actions to that point could be seen as entirely justified. But once Edward III was in place, Mortimer's actions increasingly became self-defensive, more about preserving his and Queen Isabella's position ruling in the young king's name, than about what was best for the country. And Edward III was only going to grow into his role and chafe against the rule of his mother and her lover.
Ian Mortimer (no relation, I'm sure!) is in my opinion one of the best writers of popular history out there. I have enjoyed every one of his books, and this is as well-written, interesting and engaging as the rest. I was particularly fascinated by his theory on the survival of Edward II, which he presents quite convincingly. Won me over, at any rate. If only all popular history was as enjoyable as this!
sophronisba's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.25
This is in many ways an accomplished biography of an important figure in medieval history, who has been less written about than he should have been. So far, so good. Ian Mortimer is an excellent writer and in general he does a good job of both narrating Mortimer's life and actions, and analyzing various historical controversies. But there is one huge exception, which spoiled the book for me: Mortimer is the primary supporter of the theory that Edward II escaped, survived, and wandered about the earth as a hermit for a few years. I'm sorry, I cannot get behind this idea. It sounds like a legend or a cautionary tale, but Mortimer takes it absolutely seriously, and that makes me take this book less seriously. Sorry, Professor Mortimer, but for this I was forced to dock you an entire star.
lisa_setepenre's review
5.0
Roger Mortimer often features as something of the boogie man in the narratives about Edward II and Isabella of France. With Isabella, Roger led the rebellion that resulted in Edward II’s deposition and shockingly vile murder (at least, that’s how the story goes), and though he may be characterised as a dashing romantic hero who rescued Isabella from her unhappy marriage, he is frequently is blamed for the ills and tyranny that characterised their rule of England during Edward III’s minority.
Yet while “boogie man” may be an easy label to give Roger, it is not perhaps fair to the man, and so historian Ian Mortimer’s The Greatest Traitor sets out to find the man behind the villainous role.
The Greatest Traitor was a sheer joy to read. Mortimer’s writing was engaging and clear, it was so easy to get swept along and want to read another chapter. There are times where I felt that Mortimer was too dramatic, perhaps showing more of a novelist’s flair than a historian’s objective stance, but these were often few enough that it didn’t seriously detract from the experience of reading.
The scholarship, I felt, was top-notch. It was first published in 2003 and shows its age in some ways (for instance, Mortimer now thinks he needs to rewrite this book to firstly deal with Edward II's death and because he no longer believes Roger and Isabella were lovers), but Mortimer’s arguments are logical and easy to follow. I never felt lost or confused about his conclusions. I don’t know if I believe Edward II lived past his traditional date of death (perhaps because “this historical person secretly survived” narratives always seem too good to be true at first and then seem terribly depressing if real), but Mortimer’s arguments are convincing.
Finally, I appreciated Mortimer’s approach. I wasn’t someone who thought a lot about Roger Mortimer but was inclined to think poorly of him. Having read this, I feel that he is a lot more complicated than I initially thought and again, shows that historical figures are complex people who cannot simply be divided into the categories of good or bad, victim or villain.
5 stars.
Yet while “boogie man” may be an easy label to give Roger, it is not perhaps fair to the man, and so historian Ian Mortimer’s The Greatest Traitor sets out to find the man behind the villainous role.
The Greatest Traitor was a sheer joy to read. Mortimer’s writing was engaging and clear, it was so easy to get swept along and want to read another chapter. There are times where I felt that Mortimer was too dramatic, perhaps showing more of a novelist’s flair than a historian’s objective stance, but these were often few enough that it didn’t seriously detract from the experience of reading.
The scholarship, I felt, was top-notch. It was first published in 2003 and shows its age in some ways (for instance, Mortimer now thinks he needs to rewrite this book to firstly deal with Edward II's death and because he no longer believes Roger and Isabella were lovers), but Mortimer’s arguments are logical and easy to follow. I never felt lost or confused about his conclusions. I don’t know if I believe Edward II lived past his traditional date of death (perhaps because “this historical person secretly survived” narratives always seem too good to be true at first and then seem terribly depressing if real), but Mortimer’s arguments are convincing.
Finally, I appreciated Mortimer’s approach. I wasn’t someone who thought a lot about Roger Mortimer but was inclined to think poorly of him. Having read this, I feel that he is a lot more complicated than I initially thought and again, shows that historical figures are complex people who cannot simply be divided into the categories of good or bad, victim or villain.
5 stars.
librarianonparade's review
5.0
Roger Mortimer has always been one of the more shadowy figures of medieval history, obscured by centuries of historical assumption and oversight and by his own determination to remain the power behind the throne, the figure in the shadows pulling the strings. And that's a shame, because in this excellent biography from Ian Mortimer, he comes across as a truly fascinating figure and quite a sympathetic one too - ironic for a man who quite probably earns the title of 'greatest traitor', who deposed a king, had a passionate affair with the queen, usurped the power of the Crown and ruled through the young Edward III as the true power in the land.
Roger Mortimer's greatest tragedy seems to be that he was not royal - if he'd had even the faintest shadow of a claim to the throne, one suspects he would have proved to be a very good king. He was honest and honourable, utterly loyal to the Crown until pushed too far by Edward II, a skilled tactician and warrior, a good administrator. He made an excellent servant to the Crown until he and many of the other nobles could no longer tolerate Edward II's tyranny, favouritism and mismanagement, and then he made a very very bad enemy.
And from that point on Mortimer's fate was set. The deposition of Edward II was popular, supported by nobles, commons and clergy, and Mortimer's actions to that point could be seen as entirely justified. But once Edward III was in place, Mortimer's actions increasingly became self-defensive, more about preserving his and Queen Isabella's position ruling in the young king's name, than about what was best for the country. And Edward III was only going to grow into his role and chafe against the rule of his mother and her lover.
Ian Mortimer (no relation, I'm sure!) is in my opinion one of the best writers of popular history out there. I have enjoyed every one of his books, and this is as well-written, interesting and engaging as the rest. I was particularly fascinated by his theory on the survival of Edward II, which he presents quite convincingly. Won me over, at any rate. If only all popular history was as enjoyable as this!
Roger Mortimer's greatest tragedy seems to be that he was not royal - if he'd had even the faintest shadow of a claim to the throne, one suspects he would have proved to be a very good king. He was honest and honourable, utterly loyal to the Crown until pushed too far by Edward II, a skilled tactician and warrior, a good administrator. He made an excellent servant to the Crown until he and many of the other nobles could no longer tolerate Edward II's tyranny, favouritism and mismanagement, and then he made a very very bad enemy.
And from that point on Mortimer's fate was set. The deposition of Edward II was popular, supported by nobles, commons and clergy, and Mortimer's actions to that point could be seen as entirely justified. But once Edward III was in place, Mortimer's actions increasingly became self-defensive, more about preserving his and Queen Isabella's position ruling in the young king's name, than about what was best for the country. And Edward III was only going to grow into his role and chafe against the rule of his mother and her lover.
Ian Mortimer (no relation, I'm sure!) is in my opinion one of the best writers of popular history out there. I have enjoyed every one of his books, and this is as well-written, interesting and engaging as the rest. I was particularly fascinated by his theory on the survival of Edward II, which he presents quite convincingly. Won me over, at any rate. If only all popular history was as enjoyable as this!
More...