King Charles I twice mobilised England in an attempt to enforce religious uniformity in Scotland, and both times he failed. The result was the resurgence of Parliament as partner in the government of the realm. The Bishops' Wars is an essay in military history in a political context, which analyses the institutions of war, its financing, and above all the recruitment of forces. The main purpose of the book is to explain why the King could not and did not reduce Scotland by force. Its significance lies in that it demonstrates how the military failures of 1639 and 1640 were determined by Charles's hand. Moreover, it seeks to show how poor strategic and tactical operations, coupled with the political controversy surrounding the war, plagued the English army. In the final measure, it is concluded that the King must bear responsibility for defeat at the hands of the Scots. "Fissel sustains his argument with a breadth and depth of research that is truly impressive....one can hardly dismiss the author's meticulously documented case....Fissel has made an important contribution to the debate on the origins of the English Civil Wars and, more broadly, to the literature on war and the early modern state. Scholars interested in either question should read this very fine book." Journal of Modern History "...his work is of value and originality, based as it is on close research in the archives and a complete mastery of the printed sources...his main contribution lies in his very full investigation of the manner in which the armies of 1639 and 1640 were raised and of the deficiencies that rendered them unfit for battle." Austin Woolrych, Times Literary Supplement "Mark Charles Fissel has produced an immensely impressive piece of scholarship based upon a wealth of manuscript and secondary sources." Michael Young, Albion "His book serves as an excellent corrective to the new neo-Royalists....Fissel must be commended for his ability to look beyond England, not only at Ireland but more importantly at the king's enemies in Scotland. He has made good use of the relevant secondary works, and he has examined a number of documents that contain revealing material on the covenanter and Royal armies....It should receive a place on the reading lists of all courses dealing with the 'English Civil War' (more appropriately the Wars of the Three Kingdoms)." Edward M. Furgol, American Historical Review A study of Charles I's two unsuccessful attempts to bring religious conformity to Scotland. A persistent theme in the military history I have written is the collision of cultures through the use of force. The Bishops' Wars  argues that English political culture undermined the Crown's ability to force its will on Scotland, when the latter realm resisted English "ecclesiastical imperialism."  The Bishops' Wars garnered some attention because the book shed light on the origins of the British Civil Wars, particularly in its investigation of Exchequer and Ordnance Office records. According to a Cambridge don, "Fissel's case is very convincingly argued, and it is based on an impressive range of primary sources, many of which, notably the records of the Exchequer and Ordnance Office, have never before been thoroughly explored for these years" ( English Historical Review , September 1996, pp. 283-4)  The depth of the research was noted in virtually all the reviews. The Bishops' Wars is "a very good book . . . . researched widely in English, Scottish, and American archives" ( American Historical Review , April 1996). The London Times Literary Supplement (30 December 1994, p. 25) observed that the present writer's "work is of value and originality, based as it is on close research in the archives and a complete mastery of the printed sources." That verdict was seconded by a reviewer in the Journal of Modern History , who wrote, "Fissel sustains his argument with a breadth of research that is truly impressive" (vol. 68, no. 2, June 1996). "Mark Charles Fissel has produced an immensely impressive piece of scholarship based upon a wealth of manuscript and secondary sources" ( Albion vol. 27, no. 3, Fall 1995, pp. 488-9). King Charles I twice mobilized England in an attempt to enforce religious uniformity in Scotland, and both times he failed. The result was the resurgence of Parliament as partner in the government of the realm. "The Bishops' Wars" is an essay in military history in a political context, which analyses the institutions of war, its financing, and above all the recruitment of forces. The main purpose of the book is to explain why the King could not and did not reduce Scotland by force. The book is significant in that it demonstrates how the military failures of 1639 and 1640 were determined by Charles's hand. Moreover, it seeks to show how poor strategic aand tactical operations, coupled with the political controversy surrounding the war, plagued the English army. In the final measure, it is concluded that the King must bear res