This is the first of Dan Jones' medieval histories that I've tackled. As is common these days the book zooms in on a particular year, in this case 1215. I wondered at first whether he'd be able to keep up the pace and fill a book with interest. Never fear, the book is a masterful blend of narrative, with asides on aspects such as the rights of Free Men and serfs, life in London and crime and punishment. The social history is related in a very readable, jargon free and fascinating style.
Lest readers fear that this book will be a regurgitation of material solely about the Magna Carta, Jones includes much other material. In fact he concludes that contemporaries would probably have rated the fourth Lateran Council as far more significant.
Jones footnotes well with some interesting asides, and provides an extensive bibliography.
The drama of the year, King John's character and escapades and set pieces such as the siege of Rochester are well relayed. This is a fast moving well researched book that stands as an excellent introduction to medieval life. ( )

A good overview of the period and subject matter overall, that complement's Mr Jones other recent title 'Magna Carta'.

There is some important information about law and legal process, as well as the society and culture of the period, and of Key figures involved.
Whist the Bibliography demonstrated that the book is clearly well researched, with extensive consultation of primary source material, I did get the impression that there seemed to be some serious over-simplifications and generalizations about certain issues (such as the dietary habits of Medieval Englishmen and the status of women), which other works or sources have caused me to doubt.

I also got the distinct impression in some places, that, although published by the London-based Head of Zeus the book was aimed towards an American audience (with the explanations of geographical features in the UK, or explaining the locations of various towns, cities and building). Perhaps this was the reason for some of the generalizations about the period- or indeed, could this be simply be a republished and revised version of his US title 'Magna Carta: Birth of Liberty'? I have noticed some similarity in a few of the chapter headings, for example.

Perhaps the above stated about generalizations is an incorrect assumption, but even so, seeing this trend in books and documentaries made by Brits for general comsumption in the Americas annoys me.
Why should our American cousins have to have thier history 'watered down' so to speak? Its an insult to people who are quite capable of appreciating the naunces and complexity of the past.

In conclusion, I would certainly commend this as a good and useful book, as well as an interesting introduction to the social history of the period- but I would recommend further reading for those wanting to learn more. I'm sure Mr Jones would not object.....
( )

I appreciated learning more about the background to the Magna Carta. Chapters about the history of the period that led up to the event and followed the signing are alternated with cultural background information. ( )