Richelieu and Olivares (Canto original series)

J.H. Elliott was a rarity in academia. He could offer powerful insights and transcend the discipline of history while still presenting a readable and sparkling narrative. All of his strengths are on display in this look at 17th century rivals Richelieu and Olivares. While shedding some light on the two figures and the governments they led, offering both comparisons and contrasts, Elliott’s insights move beyond the realm of history to politics and leadership. There is a great deal to learn here, though Elliott offered even more on Olivares in his excellent biography for readers not satisfied with this quick book. Highest recommendation.

Arrived early and in good condition

Lots of research and the compare/contrast approach explains somewhat the emergence of power after Spain and Portugal's declines.You have to want to discover these approaches as it is not a pleasant story and the royals were not pleasant people to deal with. Form the most part their belief in divine empowerment with less education made them difficult to see the big picture which Richelieu was able to accomplish.

Justly esteemed as one of the great works of history, J.H. Elliot's magnificent account of the death struggle between the "Count- Duke of Olivares", Baltazar Guzman, and Cardinal Richelieu, and therefore, between Hapsburg Spain and Bourbon France for the mastery of seventeenth century Europe. This study focused more upon thee character of the antagonists and the social, political, cultural and economic problems they faced. It was a battle between titans. However, one was standing on solid rock; the other, on quicksand.

This is justly considered a modern classic. Richelieu is famous. But who has heard of his rival, the chief minister of Spain, the Count-Duke Olivares? France won, Spain lost, and Olivares slipped into obscurity and historical disdain. Elliott's take is that Richelieu and Olivares were mirrors, facing very similar issues and trials, and both exemplars of their times. Their long struggle ended in a victory for Richelieu, but for Elliott, the result was not because of any deficiencies on Olivares's part, but a matter of Spain's inferior economic arrangements; and that France's victory was a close one after all.This is an excellent introduction to the great Hapsburg/Bourbon rivalry that rearranged the powers of Europe, setting the scene for the age of colonization.

In the early 17th century, Richelieu was the principal minister of Louis XIII of France and Olivares was the same for Philip IV of Spain, the two greatest European states of their time. In this interesting parallel biography, concentrating on their ministerial careers, Elliott seeks to show that, although Olivares and Richelieu were enemies, they were similar in many ways. Both were reformers, aiming at the construction of a centralised monarchy; both tried to increase the political influence of their countries, and both held onto power as advisors to weak kings to achieve this. They both led their nations into war to gain European predominance and they had to face military, economic and political crises in fighting wars that continued after their deaths. Elliott may be too keen to show their similarities rather than any differences, but this is the result his comparative treatment.If Olivares was a statesman of the same rank as Richelieu, why is he now largely forgotten? Part of Elliott's answer is that the problems Olivares faced in Spain were greater than those Richelieu faced in France, particularly the lack of unity between the various territories of the Spanish monarchy and the problems of controlling them. Although this might suggest that he should have concentrated on domestic matters, Olivares embarked on an aggressive foreign policy whose failure led to war with France, and eventually their being on opposite sides in the Thirty Years War, to the frustration of his aims and finally his dismissal. Another element, which Elliott is rather reluctant to concede, is that although Olivares was able and hard-working, Richelieu was more decisive and better able to use any opportunities as they arose. In addition, Olivares faced only slight opposition in Spain until almost the end of his career, but Richelieu faced continual opposition from those who wished for a compromise peace with Spain. On balance therefore, Richelieu was the better statesman and, as France won the war, he is rememberedElliott's parallel study of the two statesmen is interesting and, in clarifying the significance of Olivares and rescuing him from obscurity, he presents a readable introduction to Olivares for English students. He is obviously the master of his subject and writes clearly and with empathy for his two subjects.

This book was purchased for a class. It was easy to read and brought to light the importance of historical context