As an adult, he was overshadowed by his charismatic older brother, the warrior king and victor of Agincourt, Henry V. Yet Henry trusted John the most of all his brothers and twice left him to rule England during his expeditions in France. John Duke of Bedford was the man who really governed England for almost half of his brother’s nine-year reign.
John reached the pinnacle of his career when he was appointed Regent of France. As Regent, he governed a polity that had not existed for three centuries: a truly Anglo-Norman realm. It was not just ruled by England but populated by English settlers who lived & fought alongside the French.
For thirteen years, John held the English kingdom of France together on the negotiating table and often on the battlefield. He struggled against renegade soldiers and his adversary, Charles VII of France, but sometimes against the political machinations of his relatives to keep his late brother’s dream alive.
John became a man noted for equitable rule and an unshakeable commitment to justice. In England, people looked to him to heal the divisions which poisoned Henry VI’s government, and in France, they viewed him as the only statesman fully committed to the good governance of Normandy and Paris.
Today, John is only remembered as the man who condemned Joan of Arc, even though he was not involved. This biography provides a much-needed reassessment of John’s life and political career.
~ ~ ~
My thoughts are mixed with this one.
This purports to be a biography on John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford, Regent of France and bother of Henry V, King of England; however, John really only comes into his own halfway through as before that he is lost amid a sea of Henrys.
After noting his birth, it is not really until about page 51 that John makes his political entrance under the mentorship of Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmoreland (c.1403) - and this is roughly the same time any real page time has been dedicated / allocated to him. He reappears again at page 108 when recognised as Henry V's heir presumptive and is summoned to France (1419); page 122 when made regent of France (1422). Even after this, it is still hit and miss through to page 187, which marks the end of the tome, with a two paragraph summary of his life, influence and achievements.
Much of the information contained therein is readily available on the internet. Too much time was spent of Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V and other (unnecessary) diversions for this to be even considered a relevant biography of a singular individual. Providing the basic history of the era is fine - getting bogged down in it due to a lack of biographical information on your primary subject is another matter. And unfortunately, too often this is the case - preferable to read the synopsis and move on.
For someone well-read on the period, this is pretty basic stuff and in fact there is nothing new here at all. For a dedicated "re-assessment" I was expecting so much more. For some-one new to this period, there may be some confusion as to whom this book is actually about - it reads as a basic history of the events leading up to the war in France, using John of Lancaster is a very flimsy anchor. So much more of John's life and career could have been explored without the information dump. If the information is not there / not available - don't just fill the pages for the sake of it. I personally would rather read 50 pages of fact than 200 pages of waffle.
As initially mentioned, this tome brought about mixed thoughts - one, being kudos for selecting to write about John of Lancaster, and two, points off for presentation and delivery; this was poorly executed. To my mind, John of Lancaster is never in the forefront of this narrative.
"A much-needed reassessment of John’s life and political career" this most definitely is not.
