[SCA-BMDL] TMR 06.03.02, Hicks, Edward IV (Ford) (fwd)

Wed Mar 1 10:31:34 EST 2006

Another book :-)

This book sounds perfect for getting a strong grasp on how sources are
skewed and how to take a variety of sources into account when doing
research not only about people (which is the focus of this book) but
places and events.

Odriana

"Do not dismiss the dish saying that it is just, simply food. The blessed thing is an entire civilization in itself!"
- Abdulhak Sinasi

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:18:31 -0500
From: The Medieval Review <tmr-l at wmich.edu>
To: tmr-l at wmich.edu
Subject: TMR 06.03.02, Hicks, Edward IV (Ford)

Hicks, Michael. Edward IV. Reputations. London: Hodder
Arnold and New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Pp. xiii,
273. $29.95. ISBN 0-340-76006-0 (pb).

    Reviewed by Lisa Ford
         Yale University
         drllford at yahoo.com

The stated purpose of this book, part of the Reputations series
from Arnold Publishing, is to examine the person in question
via a range of representations, some of striking
incompatibility, in an attempt to give the reader a sumptuous
feast of opinion on a particular notable person in history.
This book succeeds admirably in that regard, and will serve a
highly useful purpose in the libraries of late medieval
scholars and students as both a handy reference to the works of
historians and chroniclers of Edward IV, and a statement of the
state of play in historical discourse on Edward at any point up
to the start of the 21st century.

Hicks appears quite well-acquainted with the historiography he
seeks to elucidate, displaying knowledge of the wide range of
primary and secondary sources that provide varying perspectives
of Edward IV, from such early manuscripts as the Somnium
Vigilantis to Elizabethan verse tragedies to 1066 and
All That. He canvasses the early providential themes of
Edward IV's historiography, the first serious Yorkist
biographies by Buck and Habington, the influences of the
Enlightenment, Romantic, and constitutional scholars, and the
later 20th century flurry of work on Edward IV, finishing with
the most recent, and novel, approach by Jonathan Hughes. This
project occupies the first five chapters; Hicks then shifts to
an examination of various issues such as Edward's marriage,
finances, wars, and relations with the nobility.

Hicks approaches his task in a scrupulously pro-con style, with
chapters composed of sections in which the narrative necessary
to set the scene is interspersed with, or followed by, Hicks
presentation of the fors and againsts in regard to a particular
issue. Indeed, Hicks frequently uses that exact language: in
Chapter Three, sections are explicitly titled Against and For
and pit the views of Philippe de Commynes, a Flemish-born
councilor and servant of both Charles the Bold and Louis XI,
against those of the Crowland chronicler. Equally scrupulously,
throughout the book Hicks delivers cautions to the reader and
historian regarding the biases of sources, the presence of
equal, but conflicting, views which are a natural part of
historical discourse, and the presence of partisanship taken to
extremes from Edward's time period forward.

The chapters are rich in detail, and admirably canvass the
chroniclers and historians who have contributed to Edward's
reputation.  Hicks intersperses candid comments on the
shortcomings or prejudices that may prevail on behalf of
ancient chroniclers, such as the pointed reminder that Commynes
wrote his memoirs as a disappointed man, whose treachery had
not borne the fruits in rank, power or length of service that
had been hoped, a comment more relevant to Commynes judgment of
Charles VIII, but still pertinent. Hicks is equally pungent
about modern commentators, such as his comment after one
quotation that anachronistic prejudice wars here with
penetrating insights. Both the text and the footnotes give the
interested reader treasure trove from which to follow up on
comments or observations that intrigue, and enable one to
quickly sort the standard bearers of the pro- and con-Edwardian
theories and perspectives.

Hicks interlards his prose with modern colloquialisms, such as
a reference to Yorkist spin doctors, or Henry VI's credit
rating.  He also provides some compelling turns of phrase, such
as rebels being hanged by the purse or characterizing some of
Edward's financial maneuvers as a consummately successful
confidence trick. His style is fluid and highly readable, but
there are points in which even the experienced scholar may
experience momentary confusion, as it is not always immediately
clear whether the commentary being made is ironic, part of a
deliberately chosen modern or historical viewpoint, or a
straightforward view of the author's.  Hicks may launch into a
section by matter-of-factly laying out views which one comes to
realize, as one reads on, are deliberately negative or positive
perspectives on the issue at hand, after which he slides almost
seamlessly into the opposing views. Thus, a close and sustained
reading of the text is essential in order not to miss the
point, and the book is probably more easily ingested by a
scholar already familiar with the subject, than by an
undergraduate student coming to it cold.

Hicks' control of the authorial viewpoint is admirable. His
prose conveys the gaze of an author standing back from the
parade of history and historiography and describing the passage
of events through the eyes of their commentators, even to the
section in which Hicks comments upon his own work in the third
person.  He has definite opinions, which emerge either directly
or indirectly, and to which he sticks, even while elucidating
other points of view, but he gives each person's opinion its
due. His genealogy of the scholarly House of McFarlane is as
intriguing as his commentary on their work, and students
attempting to get a handle on the arguments will find this
section a ready guide as to where modern historians line up
regarding Edward IV.  Hicks critiques are politic, though he
reiterates more than once the point that modern historians must
work from a comprehension of the views expressed in the
historical period under consideration, rather than override
them with contemporary judgments. Hicks dismisses unequivocally
the insertion of modern standards for medieval ones as
anachronistic and disqualified as history.

The volume could have benefited from a final editorial pass to
catch scattered small typos, but such is a minor point compared
to the enjoyment and satisfaction of reading this book. With
the current interest in personal myth, representation, and
image as related to historical figures, which has generated
such scholarly volumes as The Myth of Elizabeth, edited
by Thomas S. Freeman and Susan Doran, or such popular websites
as William Wallace: The Truth Behind the Man, this book
should prove of great interest to those wanting a complete
parsing of the contributions to Edward IV's historiography
close at hand. It will make a profound contribution to the
breaking of Yorkist myths related to Edward, both those
generated by ancient commentators and those being created anew
by modern historians. Nothing is sacred and if one is not
content with the summations and opinions offered by Hicks, one
knows exactly where to go to read up and make one's own
assessments.