Unappealing style

I'm an avid admirer of Ian Mortimer, having just completed his exceptional biography of Henry IV. The anticipation for his Henry V book had me trembling with excitement, akin to a thoroughbred racehorse at the starting gate. His work on Edward III is a timeless masterpiece and holds a special place as my favorite.

Yet, this remarkable author managed to astonish me once more. He transformed the most enthralling and action-laden story in English history into a dull read. The book delves deeply into religious disputes, detailed cargo inventories, royal expenses, and day-to-day trivia from the year 1415. I persisted with the book as long as possible, aware that England's most celebrated battle was imminent, but it seemed to recede the closer I got.

I might have continued, but then Dan Jones released a new book titled 'Henry V,' promising a little more dynamism and less minutiae, prompting me to switch allegiance before Henry even departed from Southampton.

The monotony stems from Mortimer's narrative technique. He opts for a diary-like format, assigning an entry to every day of 1415, regardless of its significance. Putting aside my stylistic concerns, Mortimer's research is thorough, his writing superb, his expertise on the subject unparalleled, and he certainly knows how to weave an engaging tale when he opts for the appropriate style. I'm confident that had I persisted, I would have been captivated by his account of the battle. Mortimer stands among the distinguished authors on Agincourt, and I comprehend his need to stand out. However, as a writer of his caliber, he could have achieved distinction with his customary narrative style.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!