Search
Search results
Deborah (162 KP) rated Dangerous Days in Elizabethan England: Thieves, Tricksters, Bards and Bawds in Books
Dec 19, 2018
Quite amusing in places, but there were some errors - Henry VIII's will did in fact reinstate Mary and Elizabeth and after that went for the descendants of younger sister Mary (the Greys) over older sister Margaret (the Scottish line). It was Edward's Device for the Succession which looked to overturn that.
There was some off-beat facts thrown in, but would have been nice to have some explanation too. It mentions a fine if you sold the meat of a Bull without it having been baited but doesn't explain why (this might have driven me mad, but I had just read Ruth Goodman's How to be a Tudor, which explains about how they believed this would tenderise the meat! I highly recommend the book!).
There was some off-beat facts thrown in, but would have been nice to have some explanation too. It mentions a fine if you sold the meat of a Bull without it having been baited but doesn't explain why (this might have driven me mad, but I had just read Ruth Goodman's How to be a Tudor, which explains about how they believed this would tenderise the meat! I highly recommend the book!).
Deborah (162 KP) rated Queen of Silks in Books
Dec 21, 2018
Overall I found this to be a well written novel with evidently a good deal of research into the silk industry. However, the depiction of real historical events became closely woven (no pun intended!) into the plot, but this for me was a weakness.
In some places the chronology just wasn't right. In other places the internal logic was weak. For example, over the instance of the execution of Hastings, in novels which cover this event the author needs to come up with their own explanation of this as the truth is covered over by time and Tudor propoganda. Bennett makes little or no explanation for the event and has 'Dickon' acting remarkably out of character in this one scene - and I mean that following her depiction in the book and not from my personal opinion. Additionally, for someone who has had a liaison with Dickon over a period of years, Isabel, the protagonist, shows remarkably little understanding of his character and I found her at times irritating and unsympathetic.
I also felt that in the wrapping up of the story, Elizabeth of York is shown to act in a ruthless way which doesn't match at all with what we know of her in her time as the first Tudor queen. Again, failures of internal and external logic for me.
To conclude, a well-written book, and I am not adverse by reading more from this author, but for me the historical event aspect didn't hang together well enough and was at times frustrating. I think it would have been a better novel if it left the larger political landscape well alone.
In some places the chronology just wasn't right. In other places the internal logic was weak. For example, over the instance of the execution of Hastings, in novels which cover this event the author needs to come up with their own explanation of this as the truth is covered over by time and Tudor propoganda. Bennett makes little or no explanation for the event and has 'Dickon' acting remarkably out of character in this one scene - and I mean that following her depiction in the book and not from my personal opinion. Additionally, for someone who has had a liaison with Dickon over a period of years, Isabel, the protagonist, shows remarkably little understanding of his character and I found her at times irritating and unsympathetic.
I also felt that in the wrapping up of the story, Elizabeth of York is shown to act in a ruthless way which doesn't match at all with what we know of her in her time as the first Tudor queen. Again, failures of internal and external logic for me.
To conclude, a well-written book, and I am not adverse by reading more from this author, but for me the historical event aspect didn't hang together well enough and was at times frustrating. I think it would have been a better novel if it left the larger political landscape well alone.
Deborah (162 KP) rated The Tudor Rose in Books
Dec 21, 2018
This book was written over 50 years ago, so I suppose we must make some allowances for light that has been shed on past events between now and then, but still, there were a number of silly errors in this book which didn't help its credibility: the pre-contract was with Eleanor Butler (nee Talbot) and for some odd reason the book gives her given name as Joan, and Edmund Tudor died of the plague and not in battle.
Overall the book follows a somewhat traditionalist stance, although Henry Tudor comes across as pretty cold and unlikeable. I wasn't convinced by some of the internal logic and some of the characterisation though. Anne Neville, for example. She is a figure we really don't know that much about, but it's hard to conceive she could be as simple and naive as she is portrayed here! Barnes does try it on a bit with trying to make us wonder if 'Perkin' is really Richard of York (and here the historical novelist has licence, because we really don't know!), despite having Bess keep adamantly stating that she knows her brothers are dead. We're also told that Elizabeth Woodville believes they died, which might lead one to question why she would have a finger in a rebellion against her daughter as queen consort? And if everybody really believed this, why did Sir William Stanley lose his head for saying he wouldn't fight against 'Perkin' if he was really a son of Edward IV - and that is in the historical record as well as this novel. There's an awful lot about Bess believing both Richard and Henry have potentially been culpable in acts of murder, but she herself in this novel is guilty of an act of treachery that is at least as bad!
Not a badly written novel, but I found it frustrating overall!
Overall the book follows a somewhat traditionalist stance, although Henry Tudor comes across as pretty cold and unlikeable. I wasn't convinced by some of the internal logic and some of the characterisation though. Anne Neville, for example. She is a figure we really don't know that much about, but it's hard to conceive she could be as simple and naive as she is portrayed here! Barnes does try it on a bit with trying to make us wonder if 'Perkin' is really Richard of York (and here the historical novelist has licence, because we really don't know!), despite having Bess keep adamantly stating that she knows her brothers are dead. We're also told that Elizabeth Woodville believes they died, which might lead one to question why she would have a finger in a rebellion against her daughter as queen consort? And if everybody really believed this, why did Sir William Stanley lose his head for saying he wouldn't fight against 'Perkin' if he was really a son of Edward IV - and that is in the historical record as well as this novel. There's an awful lot about Bess believing both Richard and Henry have potentially been culpable in acts of murder, but she herself in this novel is guilty of an act of treachery that is at least as bad!
Not a badly written novel, but I found it frustrating overall!
Deborah (162 KP) rated Fatal Colours in Books
Dec 21, 2018
Overall I thought this was a good book written in a very readable style. I've only given it 3 stars, however, as it does fall down in a number of ways.
First and foremost, the title of the book is a bit misleading. The Battle of Towton itself accounts for probably no more than a quarter of the text. I'm not saying the the rest of the book is bad, because it deals with the whole 'first half' of the Wars of the Roses and looks at how Henry VI's incapacity to rule (and the reasons for this) where in some degree responsible for the conflict, but it might be disappointing if you were expecting a full on coverage of Towton. You could try Andrew Boardman's book instead if you were interested in the battle.
My second disappointment was the introduction. Why would you ask Starkey, a well known Tudor historian, with a typical Tudor historian rabid anti-Yorkist views to write an introduction to a book ostensibly about one of the great Yorkist victories? This was one reason I held off buying this book for quite some time, not helped by the fact that the Kindle download sample was just part of this introduction, which wasn't helpful at all.
Goodwin delivered his own Coup de Grace in my eyes right at the end where he almost offhandedly accused Richard III of both the murder of his nephews (hotly debated, I admit, but without a shred of solid evidence) and then saying he 'probably' murdered Henry VI!!! Unless you take Shakespeare as gospel, there is absolutely no evidence at all for this and it's most unlikely. These couple of throwaway comments severely undermined Goodwin's credibility, which was a shame, as I felt that the book overall was good, but it makes me wonder if there was other sloppy research in there?
First and foremost, the title of the book is a bit misleading. The Battle of Towton itself accounts for probably no more than a quarter of the text. I'm not saying the the rest of the book is bad, because it deals with the whole 'first half' of the Wars of the Roses and looks at how Henry VI's incapacity to rule (and the reasons for this) where in some degree responsible for the conflict, but it might be disappointing if you were expecting a full on coverage of Towton. You could try Andrew Boardman's book instead if you were interested in the battle.
My second disappointment was the introduction. Why would you ask Starkey, a well known Tudor historian, with a typical Tudor historian rabid anti-Yorkist views to write an introduction to a book ostensibly about one of the great Yorkist victories? This was one reason I held off buying this book for quite some time, not helped by the fact that the Kindle download sample was just part of this introduction, which wasn't helpful at all.
Goodwin delivered his own Coup de Grace in my eyes right at the end where he almost offhandedly accused Richard III of both the murder of his nephews (hotly debated, I admit, but without a shred of solid evidence) and then saying he 'probably' murdered Henry VI!!! Unless you take Shakespeare as gospel, there is absolutely no evidence at all for this and it's most unlikely. These couple of throwaway comments severely undermined Goodwin's credibility, which was a shame, as I felt that the book overall was good, but it makes me wonder if there was other sloppy research in there?
ClareR (5551 KP) rated The Other Boleyn Girl in Books
Jun 24, 2019
I read this quite a long time ago, but I have to say that I do read all of Philippa Gregory’s books because they’re just really good stories. I do have a bit of a thing about the Tudor period, and I’ve read a fair bit of both fiction and non-fiction around the period. I’m aware that this (and her others) may be heavily fictionalised, but part of reading is entertainment, no? But I do like how I feel immersed in these stories.
And who knew that Anne Boleyn’s sister had an affair with Henry VIII before Anne married him (well, when the book came out, not many people seemed to know - unless they were very heavily into their history!)? And honestly, I wouldn’t be overly surprised if a lot of goes on in the book actually happened!
And who knew that Anne Boleyn’s sister had an affair with Henry VIII before Anne married him (well, when the book came out, not many people seemed to know - unless they were very heavily into their history!)? And honestly, I wouldn’t be overly surprised if a lot of goes on in the book actually happened!
Not for me!
Why do I keep doing this to myself? Challenge yourself, Clare! Try something you've never read before!
I really need to stop doing this. It rarely ends well. Tudor authors could really have done with better/ any editors. Fact. Get some paragraphs in there, write some shorter sentences, stop wittering on and on and on.....
On a positive note, I now know where the term 'utopian' comes from, and I can safely say that the meaning has altered somewhat over the last 500 years or so. What was utopian then still seems a bit feudalistic now. At least good old Thomas More got everyone thinking though! As a 21st century reader, I can see how daring this book would have been: Kings without riches, no prisons for criminals, people could worship whoever and however they wanted. Very forward thinking for the 16th century. All the same, not a book for me. It was like wading through literary treacle. Not something I'd recommend!
I really need to stop doing this. It rarely ends well. Tudor authors could really have done with better/ any editors. Fact. Get some paragraphs in there, write some shorter sentences, stop wittering on and on and on.....
On a positive note, I now know where the term 'utopian' comes from, and I can safely say that the meaning has altered somewhat over the last 500 years or so. What was utopian then still seems a bit feudalistic now. At least good old Thomas More got everyone thinking though! As a 21st century reader, I can see how daring this book would have been: Kings without riches, no prisons for criminals, people could worship whoever and however they wanted. Very forward thinking for the 16th century. All the same, not a book for me. It was like wading through literary treacle. Not something I'd recommend!
Stephin Merritt recommended Indeterminancy, New Aspect of Form in Instrumental and Electronic Music by John Cage/David Tudor in Music (curated)
Deborah (162 KP) rated Highland Surrender in Books
Dec 21, 2018
In the reign on James V (son of Margaret Tudor, the sister of Henry VIII, and father of Mary Queen of Scots) Fiona and Myles, representatives of two feuding clans, are told by the King that they must marry and form an alliance.....
Sadly, Fiona, the heroine, appears as a right Little Madam for most of the first part of the book. Even after feeling betrayed by her brothers, she is unable to reasonably question anything beyond the clan indoctrination and acts simply like a spoilt child. It's quite hard to see why Myles falls for her at all.
That said, overall this isn't a bad book. I think a bit more on the history side would have made this a more solid and exciting novel, as the ending was really rather good, but it seemed that it couldn't decide if it wanted to be an historical novel, with a romance element (think Elizabeth Chadwick) or something more akin to a bodice ripper (and nothing wrong with that!). You started off feeling there was a bigger plot at play, but this seemed to get a bit lost in the middle, before a quite exciting ending after all.
Not sure it's worth a second read, but I'd consider this author again in the future.
Sadly, Fiona, the heroine, appears as a right Little Madam for most of the first part of the book. Even after feeling betrayed by her brothers, she is unable to reasonably question anything beyond the clan indoctrination and acts simply like a spoilt child. It's quite hard to see why Myles falls for her at all.
That said, overall this isn't a bad book. I think a bit more on the history side would have made this a more solid and exciting novel, as the ending was really rather good, but it seemed that it couldn't decide if it wanted to be an historical novel, with a romance element (think Elizabeth Chadwick) or something more akin to a bodice ripper (and nothing wrong with that!). You started off feeling there was a bigger plot at play, but this seemed to get a bit lost in the middle, before a quite exciting ending after all.
Not sure it's worth a second read, but I'd consider this author again in the future.
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Katherine of Aragon, the True Queen in Books
Sep 6, 2021
144 of 250
Book
Katherine of Aragon the true Queen ( Six Tudor Wives)
By Alison Weir
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
A Spanish princess. Raised to be modest, obedient and devout. Destined to be an English Queen.
Six weeks from home across treacherous seas, everything is different: the language, the food, the weather. And for her there is no comfort in any of it. At sixteen-years-old, Catalina is alone among strangers.
She misses her mother. She mourns her lost brother.
She cannot trust even those assigned to her protection.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. The first of Henry's Queens. Her story.
History tells us how she died. This captivating novel shows us how she lived.
It took me a bit longer than normal to finish this book I really enjoyed it but came away feel so sad for Katherine. I’m fascinated with this period of history and she is one queen who always hits the heart when I read her story. This is one of the best ones I’ve read so far and knowing Alison kept as close as possible to history made me even more sad. Something about the princesses of Wales they always get dealt a hard blow by the monarchy. Overall it was a beautifully written version of her. Looking forward to reading Anne’s next.
Book
Katherine of Aragon the true Queen ( Six Tudor Wives)
By Alison Weir
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
A Spanish princess. Raised to be modest, obedient and devout. Destined to be an English Queen.
Six weeks from home across treacherous seas, everything is different: the language, the food, the weather. And for her there is no comfort in any of it. At sixteen-years-old, Catalina is alone among strangers.
She misses her mother. She mourns her lost brother.
She cannot trust even those assigned to her protection.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. The first of Henry's Queens. Her story.
History tells us how she died. This captivating novel shows us how she lived.
It took me a bit longer than normal to finish this book I really enjoyed it but came away feel so sad for Katherine. I’m fascinated with this period of history and she is one queen who always hits the heart when I read her story. This is one of the best ones I’ve read so far and knowing Alison kept as close as possible to history made me even more sad. Something about the princesses of Wales they always get dealt a hard blow by the monarchy. Overall it was a beautifully written version of her. Looking forward to reading Anne’s next.
Deborah (162 KP) rated Richard III: The King in the Car Park in Books
Dec 21, 2018
I quote from the final page of this publication: "The writer of this book will face similar virulent criticism. It will be savaged in the book reviews on Amazon, mainly by non-readers, to take its ratings and thus popularity down." In fact, this is the last, but by no means the only rant by the author who appears to have a definite chip on his shoulder for some reason. Since he subjects Thomas Penn's work, 'The Winter King' to such virulent criticism, one can only suspect that he was turned down by Penn's publisher. One can hardly be surprised. I have read this book, despite wanting on a number of occasions to give up in disgust. It is full of errors of spelling (e.g. youngest for younger, now instead of not), so has evidently not had either a proof reader or an editor. There are also many factual errors with names and titles becoming hopelessly confused. On one page we're told that Sir James Tyrell was hanged and a couple of pages later we're told that Henry Tudor was so kind as to merely condescend to cut his head off!
I will admit that with pro-Ricardian sympathies I was probably never going to like this book, but it is a bit of a mess and feels like another case of jumping on the bandwagon. There is no index, no footnotes/endnotes and only a partial list of sources, which is enough to raise questions about academic rigour. If you are going to publish opinions, particular in The Great Debate, these really should be backed up by factual evidence. I think I am most irked by the hypocrisy of Mr Breverton telling us at one point that he is going to take a fresh impartial look at the subject and then immediately showing us exactly which colour he prefers his roses.
His list, near the back of the volume, of all the 'crimes' he thinks Richard III was guilty of really does teeter on the brink of blindness and absurdity. Apparently he is guilty in the case of the Earl of Warwick, son of Richard's older brother, George of Clarence, but whose claim to the throne was barred by his father's attainder (always reversible, but Warwick was then only a child of about 8 years). I'm pretty sure this Warwick was sent to Sheriff Hutton Castle to be brought up with other young persons, as befitted his status by Richard. Of course, as soon as Henry Tudor usurped the throne, this boy was locked up in the Tower only to be executed later on a trumped up charge. I think I know who the guilty party is in that case.
That is my frank opinion on this volume; I will now expect said author to savage me as he has everyone else on Amazon who has pointed out the self-evident shortcomings in this work.
I will admit that with pro-Ricardian sympathies I was probably never going to like this book, but it is a bit of a mess and feels like another case of jumping on the bandwagon. There is no index, no footnotes/endnotes and only a partial list of sources, which is enough to raise questions about academic rigour. If you are going to publish opinions, particular in The Great Debate, these really should be backed up by factual evidence. I think I am most irked by the hypocrisy of Mr Breverton telling us at one point that he is going to take a fresh impartial look at the subject and then immediately showing us exactly which colour he prefers his roses.
His list, near the back of the volume, of all the 'crimes' he thinks Richard III was guilty of really does teeter on the brink of blindness and absurdity. Apparently he is guilty in the case of the Earl of Warwick, son of Richard's older brother, George of Clarence, but whose claim to the throne was barred by his father's attainder (always reversible, but Warwick was then only a child of about 8 years). I'm pretty sure this Warwick was sent to Sheriff Hutton Castle to be brought up with other young persons, as befitted his status by Richard. Of course, as soon as Henry Tudor usurped the throne, this boy was locked up in the Tower only to be executed later on a trumped up charge. I think I know who the guilty party is in that case.
That is my frank opinion on this volume; I will now expect said author to savage me as he has everyone else on Amazon who has pointed out the self-evident shortcomings in this work.