Most Helpful Customer Reviews
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
fair-minded and authoritative account of James' reign, March 21, 2005
This review is from: James II (The English Monarchs Series) (Paperback)
James II has been vilified as representing monarchical absolutism and militant Catholicism almost since the 1688 revolution. How such a tyrant could have been
Removed from power by a bloodless coup (in England at any rate) sits somewhat uneasily with the accepted wisdom. Miller paints a more complex picture of James eventful early life - escaping from Cromwell, shadowing his elder brother around Europe. He gives a fair account of James prowess as a naval commander and his organisational and administrative skills in the later years of the reign Charles II.
James was torn between his complete loyalty to Charles and his conversion to Catholicism in the 1680's, Charles also showed both exasperation and loyalty towards his rather awkward brother - preferring Monmouth, his natural (though not legitimate) son, but insisting that James be his successor, despite increasingly virulent opposition.
James came to view the fact of his succession - despite many travails, false alarms in terms of Charles producing a legitimate heir, and almost hysterical Whig opposition - as a sign of divine favour. Miller also points out that , for most of his reign James accepted that William of Orange - a Protestant married to his Protestant daughter, Mary - would be his successor. This gave impetus to James to improve the plight of his co-religionists and explains his haste to do so. However Parliamentary opposition to an Act of Toleration led James both to use his power to dispense with Parliamentary acts for particular individuals and to attempt to shape Parliamentary support for his proposals. Both acts were interpreted (after the Revolution) as proof of his authoritarianism. His need for a standing army became an even great cause for concern as he began to nominate more Catholic officers. In actual fact Miller shows James as acting in the tradition of the later years of Charles' rule - attempting to influence the selection and election of loyal parliamentarians, and Miller argues that James' view on legislation, dispensing and suspending powers were at least legally arguable. James did overstep the mark by attempting to populate the judiciary with loyalists (or toadies).
Miller's view however is that having succeeded in getting the most loyal parliament in 1685, James failed to recognize the limits of his parliamentary support.
Having failed to win parliament to toleration, he believed he could again reshape parliament to elect people more amenable to toleration. In this he was, to say the least, poorly advised; and this effort, combined with its consequent attack on the Church of England, led to the fall off in support which led to the invitation to William of Orange to come and help sort out the situation.
Once William landed - undeterred by French threats, the English Navy and Winter weather - James' belief in Providence seems to have collapsed and he viewed the subsequent desertions by his family and officers as a Divine punishment for past sins.
His subsequent years seemed almost to embrace the failure to regain his position and he was viewed by Louis XIV as a figure of sympathy and pity.
Millers scholarship and use of direct contemporary sources is most comprehensive, his judgements of James are clear, direct and credible. This is a book to be cherished.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Incomplete, December 3, 2006
This review is from: James II (The English Monarchs Series) (Paperback)
The life of James II is extremely intriguing: flight from England early in life, prowess as a miltary commander, conversion to Catholism, and eventual ouster in favor of William III and James' protestant daughters. Sadly, this biography does not cover in detail any of these fascinating events. Rather, Miller's focus is solely on the relationships between James, his brother, his chief advisors, Parliament, and Louis XIV. A reader unfamiliar with the political climate of the later 17th century will have difficulty enjoying this book.
In my opinion, the political intrigues (clearly important in understanding James II) could have been interwoven with a personal study of James to produce a more compelling, and well rounded, biography of a largely unknown monarch.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Strong biography of James, January 10, 2012
This review is from: James II (The English Monarchs Series) (Paperback)
John Miller's main thesis in this biography is that the major failing of James II was lack of intellectual ability and an accompanying stubbornness regarding many of his personal beliefs. I find that Miller argues his thesis well. James seemed incapable of understanding the effects of his actions on those who disagreed with him. His strength, as Miller notes, was his military prowess and courage. It seemed to be the one area where James actually felt comfortable. But this did not at all translate into astute political leadership. I had two specific positive reactions to this book. First, it changed my incorrect view of James as a hardened tyrant. With a couple notable exceptions (the "Cameronians" in Scotland and the reaction in the West to Monmouth's rebellion), James was not prone to killing or persecuting those who disagreed with him. He just never understood them. His motives may not have been pure - his actions were often in the interest of keeping his Catholicism from becoming an issue. Nevertheless, the fairly common view of James, for example, the image given in Locke's beautiful Letter Concerning Toleration, is somewhat misleading. Possibly the Anglicans were right and James was ready to be brutal in imposing his views on others if he only had absolute power. However, Miller makes a good case that throughout his life James was much more accepting than commonly thought and that particular character trait followed him into the kingship. His motives may well have been tied to a certain type of ignorance and a failure of leadership but James was no Henry VIII. The second positive response to the book was the way in which Miller highlights the power of James's conversion to Catholicism. His was a mind and set of emotions that felt absolutely secure in the highly structured Catholic world of his day. Everything is interpreted by James as God's will for him. This tended to make him stubborn and blind to those who may have seen God's will differently. The clash in his character, and the vacillations in his actions, between his belief in letting other people be and his absolute Catholic beliefs comes out time and again in the book. This often led to indecision and errors in actions which, when they failed, were again God's way of punishing him and, for him, had of course nothing to do with his own limited thought processes. James's vacillations between firmness and reconciliation, between trying to gain the support of Anglicans one day and Dissenters the next, was in the end not leadership at all. He never read well the response of others and this kind of intellectual blindness eventually did him in. Miller's book draws out the complications that did exist in this uncomplex man. His complexities, such as they were, were the result of his simplicity. William's invasion was not just a return to the status quo in terms of those who wielded the power in England. It was also a reassertion of intelligent leadership. It was a reinforcement of the truth that the ship of state cannot function without a captain who knows what he is doing. This is a fine biography.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
