5 comments about Lady Jane Grey: Nine Days Queen.

1. A book with Catherine Parr on the cover using a few embellished facts, very little research and fanciful story telling make this a book only for the passive reader.



2. I had eagerly anticipated this book for a long time, but I found it very dissapointing.

   It's more of a quick retelling of the struggle for the throne after Henry VIII's death than a biography of Jane. She's a minor character in her own biography, emerging only for brief, tersely described events.




3. Jane Grey was queen for nine short days, during a period of great turmoil. The documentary evidence from this time is rather spare; even the coins minted during this brief reign are so rare as to be valued collectors' items. Author Alison Plowden uses documentary evidence and secondary sources to reconstruct the world around this brief reign. Indeed, Jane Grey remains a shadowy figure, even with this and other biographies available, given that, as a child, she was not party to much life at court, and did not have ongoing correspondence with many people likely to preserve such writing (only a handful of personal letters remain from her).

   Plowden introduces the world of the Tudors and their friends, hangers-on and rivals from the time of Lancaster/York conflict, and Henry VII, the first Tudor king, forward. This reads like a soap opera, and indeed it was a time of intrigue, deception, jockeying for position and occasional outright evil behaviour. The executioner's task at the Tower was never wanting for more; the Tudors, Seymours, Brandons, Dudleys and other such families were intertwined in the political, religious and dynastic machinations of the time, and sometimes this late medieval machinery caught up the people as it would grind along.

   Lady Jane Grey was not born to be queen. This does not make her unique among monarchs in British history; when the current queen Elizabeth was born, it seemed very remote that she should ever advance to be monarch. Indeed, even the great Henry VIII wasn't the heir apparent when born; his brother Arthur was Prince of Wales -- Henry married his brother's widow Catherine of Aragon, and the successive sequence of wives and offspring commenced from there. Lady Jane Grey was born of none of these wives, nor even from Henry directly, but rather through one of his younger siblings, Mary, one-time queen of France.

   Plowden's tracing of the history is very much personality driven. Events and issues take a secondary role to the history she recounts here -- it is very much the people involved, who are somewhat hard to keep straight at times (when one would acquire a new title, the name changes; since these names often had predecessors also active in royal and governmental affairs, one sometimes needs charts and graphs to keep the players distinct).

   Lady Jane Grey was a mere teenager when she came to power, such as it was. A precocious and intellectual child, she still lacked the political savvy of the Privy Council and other chief executors and leaders from Henry and Edward's reigns; she was the not-always-willing but not-unwilling pawn of her family's ambitions -- at one time thought to be a possible wife for the king Edward, her family jumped at the chance of settling the crown directly on her head, under the ostensible purpose of preserving a Protestant succession.

   Ultimately, the venture was doomed to failure, for as much as the royal and parliamentary authorities like to believe they rule England, ultimately it has been the people en masse, and those whom they do not support do not last long. The common folk, still largely Catholic in leaning, also understood royal succession in simple terms -- Mary Tudor was the next in line for the throne, so they supported her (largely they would support Elizabeth, a moderate Protestant, for the same reason five years later). Lady Jane fell victim again to the problems of politics; Mary Tudor, once queen, was inclined to be lenient until it was felt that Jane's presence continued to be a rallying point for Protestant dissidents.

   Plowden's book is not a simple biography of Jane Grey, but rather a survey of the historical period, from the generation prior to the aftermath. If Jane Grey seems to be a bit lost in the sea of people in this text, that is understandable, for even though she was queen for a short time, it was hardly her own reign or her own doing, and she didn't last long enough for contemporary histories in personal detail to be written (nor was it really in the interests of others to do so during the reign of either Mary or Elizabeth). Taken as a snapshot of a short time in the Tudor dynasty, and a very unique period in British history, this is a good survey.

   This is not an historical romance, nor a narrative history done in novel style. It is a little light on notes, placed at the end rather than as footnotes, for a 'grand' history, but is still built on strong authority. The select bibliography is worthwhile, as is the index. While Plowden's language could take a little polish to good effect, the text remains interesting and factually well-executed, keeping speculation and romantic embellishment to a minimum, and clearly delineating between documentary fact, gossip and hearsay, and later interpretations and reconstructed memories.




4. I was honestly hoping that the issue with the cover portrait would have been resolved with the reprint. There is no new information that I had so hoped for from a writer as well-known as Alison Plowden. I am disappointed and would not recommend that anyone seeking facts about Lady Jane read this book. In an "information age", I had really hoped for facts, the book is so reflective of 1986. There are plenty stories about the Tudor period of our history but little factual compositions.



5. I didn't read much of "Lady Jane Grey: Nine Days Queen", but that's due to the author. However, the book is skimpy and regulated to "this event happened" and "He/she did/said this and that". Alison Plowden is a good and factual writer, but this time she paints by the numbers. Also, in her excellent four-book biography of Elizabeth I, Plowden's attitude resembles Hester W. Chapman's; she tends to get a bit terse and condescending. I guess this is why I didn't finish "Lady Jane Grey: Nine Days Queen". I simply didn't want to encounter Plowden's attitude again while reading about my favorite Tudor princess.

1 comments about Anne Neville: Queen to Richard III (England's Forgotten Queens series).

1. Anne Neville is one of the most poorly documented queens of England; Hicks originally doubted that he could find enough material. I applaud his effort, but 4 stars is somewhat generous: I award it for the uniqueness of the work and the lovely cover. This book should be of interest to the people interested in the Richard III controversies. The history and politics that determined the course of Anne's life are not well explained; anyone unfamiliar with the Wars of the Roses may want to read up on them first. Since the people mentioned here were the main actors, a few encyclopedia articles would probably be enough for a start.
   
   The book begins slowly with a chapter on Anne and Richard as fictionalized by the unavoidable William Shakespeare. Is there a law in the UK that the Wars of the Roses can't be discussed without extensive reference to the Bard? Hicks next tells us about Anne's noble ancestry; the reader should consult the genealogy at the end of the text to keep all the Richards, Annes, Isabels and Cecilys straight. Hicks might at least have included the stories about her semi-mythic ancestors: Guy of Warwick and The Swan Knight since he mentions the names. After this, Hicks launches into Anne's life history and the book is fairly good until after Anne is widowed.
   
   The rest of the book is chiefly concerned with the (dubious) dealings of her second husband, Richard, Duke of Gloucester; Anne is scanted. One would think that the death of her sister Isabel would be an event in Anne's life, let alone the attendant drama of illegal executions leading to a confrontation with Edward IV and Clarence's death, but it is mentioned almost parenthetically in a discussion of inheritance. Certainly there is room for more information: the book is only 215 pages, much of it is redundant: on p.71 Hicks tells about the consanguity between Clarence and Isabel. On pp.132-133, he gives us similar information about Richard and Anne, much of it the same. Since Clarence and Richard were brothers and Anne and Isabel were sisters, the reader probably knows a lot of this from p.71; the problem with their being cousins is obviously the same, only the issue of now being additionally related by marriage is added. Then on pp.143-144 he recounts it all again and recaps it on p.205.
   
   I belong to the Richard III Society; that does not require me to think of him as a saint (I checked before I joined), but a lot of this is silly. Hicks seems torn between trying to be fair and trying to find almost any excuse to scald Richard. This accounts for a certain amount of the redundancy: issues may be visited twice, once with a neutral interpretation, than again with an anti-Richard interpretation. At least he does include the neutral interpretations.
   
   He claims that their marriage was scandalous to their contemporaries, without quoting any who were scandalized. Related multiple times, Anne and Richard required dispensations to marry. Hicks argues that this may have been impossible, then mentions cases where such permission was granted. Proper documentation has not been found, but the marriage was accepted by their contemporaries. Hicks cites the property settlement as proof of a lack of proper dispensation, since it provides for the event of the marriage being annulled. As I recall, so did the marriage agreement for Richard's nephew, the Duke of York - this was outrageously unfair to the bride, but was this a standard provision for princes? There is also what I call the Obvious Problem: if the settlement makes it obvious that there was no dispensation, why didn't their contemporaries realize this? It was an Act of Parliament: how secret can it have been? I am much more cynical about dispensations: I think they involved more money & politics and less theology than Hicks seems to.
   
   There is no evidence that Richard and Anne married chiefly for love, but as Hicks mentions, that was typical for their time and it made sense for them to join forces. Anne had a vast inheritance which she couldn't access, Richard was possibly the only man with the influence to get it. I do not see why Richard shouldn't have fought for Anne's share, nor do I see how this necessarily "exploited" her; Hicks finds it unseemly. Anne probably wanted her share for herself (to the extent that married women had any control), and her heirs as much as Richard did.
   
   He makes provocative statements such as: "One must moreover deplore the immorality of the match. A custodial sentence and registration would result today for any man like Duke Richard [then 19] guilty of having sexual intercourse with a fifteen-year-old girl, but fifteenth century standards permitted such relations and indeed regarded them as normal and legitimate." [p.130] That's certainly having it both ways! Hicks has already told us, without any evidence of disapproval, that Margaret Beaufort was married at 12 [her husband was about 25] and a mother at 14. Anne was a already a widow before she married Richard: at 14 she had a consummated marriage with 17-year-old Edward of Lancaster. It certainly wasn't necessary to tell us again that early marriage was common; Hicks apparently just wanted to associate Richard, and only Richard, with sex offenses.
   
   On the other hand, while discussing the possibility that Richard poisoned Anne, which Hicks certainly should, he surprised me by concluding that she probably wasn't.
   
   Given the lack of personal detail for Anne's life, I think that it would have been better if Hicks had spent more time describing the usual life of a woman of her status, details of pageants that she may have attended, etc. One of the pleasures of reading biographies of ill-documented people is that the authors, not having to cram in a large amount of material, often create a better picture of the age than they do with major figures.

5 comments about The Last Man Who Knew Everything: Thomas Young, The Anonymous Polymath Who Proved Newton Wrong, Explained How We See, Cured the Sick, and Deciphered the Rosetta Stone, Among Other Feats of Genius.

1. There isn't a great deal of personal, emotional information about Thomas Young, the title polymath here. But then his life was mostly in his work. And there is a lot to be learned following Thomas' investigations of a variety of scientific and scholarly subjects.
   
   His range truly was amazing. How did people accomplish so much in previous centuries? Well, I suppose without TV to suck away time... But Thomas was exceptional even for his overachieving, turn-of-the-18th-century age. And this biography allows a reader to follow in the path of his curiosity - about how the eye works, about the nature of light, about Egyptian writing.
   
   The biographer's descriptions of Thomas' researches into the physiology of the human eye can get pretty gruesome. These pages are not for the squeamish. Thomas often used himself as subject, probing his own eye socket to get to the bottom of things.
   
   The section on his investigations into light is really enlightening and presents some of the clearest descriptions I've read of the split-screen diffraction experiment. This experiment was key in leading Thomas to his pioneering proposition that light is wave-like in nature.
   
   And then the section on his work translating the Rosetta Stone was news to me! I had always assumed that ancient Egyptian hieroglyph writing was a form of picture writing like Chinese, with each symbol representing a whole word. But Thomas' break-through lay in the realization that the Egyptian symbols were actually largely like our modern English alphabet - that each symbol represented a sound, a phoneme. And so he gave us the key to reading the inscriptions on the ancient Egyptian tombs and obelisks.
   
   The writing here is generally clear and will keep you turning page by page, tracking Thomas' investigations as he unlocks one mystery after another.



2. Chapters include:
   Preface
   Introduction
   Child Prodigy
   Fellow of the Royal Society
   Itinerant Medical Student
   'Phenomenon' Young
   Physician of Vision
   Royal Institution Lecturer
   Let There Be Light Waves
   'Natural Philosophy & the Mechanical Arts'
   Dr Thomas Young, M.D., F.R.C.P.
   Reading the Rosetta Stone
   Waves of Enlightenment
   Walking Encyclopedia
   In the Public Interest
   Grand Tour
   Dueling with Champollion
   A Universal Man
   Notes & References
   Bibliography
   Index
   
   ***** A fantastic biography of Thomas Young that is not only great for fans of history, but also for students to use in subject reports! *****
   
   
   Reviewed by Detra Fitch of Huntress Reviews.



3. Only read this book if you are secure with your own IQ. If you are not, you will leave feeling terribly inadequate as Thomas Young was amazingly portrayed in this book!!!



4. THhomas Young is more believeable as a character in a work of fiction (comprable to a Nero Wolfe or a Sherlock Holmes) than as a real person. No one can be that smart in so many areas! But the fact that he really lived makes him all the more fantastic.
   
   This is a great biography about an amazing man!
   
   Also recommended: The Man Who Created Sherlock Holmes: The Life and Times of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle



5. In Robinson's biography of Thomas Young we get an excellent picture of a scientist working in the early nineteenth century as well as the issues and difficulties faced throughout history by those who study, work and contribute knowledge in a broad range of fields and interests (otherwise known as polymaths).
   
   As Robinson himself states in the book, the biography is not meant to be a comprehensive treatment of Young's work in all of the fields to which he contributed nor does it provide an in-depth treatment of Young's work in the areas where he was most influential. Rather, it is an overview of the breadth of Young's contributions and how these contributions came to be accepted within the scientific community of the time. This is most completely described with respect to Young's work in optics (which to the acceptance of a wave theory of light) and his work in languages, most notably hieroglyphics and demotic script.
   
   What I found most interesting about the book was the analysis of Young's character and the advantages and disadvantages he experienced in having such a broad array of interests. The author clearly shows Young's tendency to enter a field of study, make important and sometimes ground breaking advances and then to move onto to other areas. In doing so, we see Young's habit of not rigorously working through all the details or implications of a discovery and the controversy that sometimes leads to.
   
   The book is well written with copious quotes both from Young and his early biographers. While I found these insightful, they were often lengthy and dry and required some work to plow through. I recommend this book to all those who find themselves studying a wide array of topics, those interested in either the history of physics or linguistics and those who wish to see how a person who belongs to a rare group of individuals (polymaths) works and interacts with the learned culture around them.

1 comments about Henry VIII's Last Victim: The Life and Times of Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey.

1. This is an excellent book on so many levels. It sheds a bright light on Henry VIII's Court, and shows it to be a complex and often dangerous place. The book reveals Henry Howard, the Earl of Surrey, to be an intelligent, talented, brave, egotistic, and ultimately doomed man. The research is also solid. Jessie Childs looks under every possible rock for any scrap of evidence, and so is able to present a vivid, full-scale biography of the Earl. But what really sets this book apart from most others is the writing, which crackles and sparks like burning logs in a fireplace.
   Jessie Childs is a fresh voice, and thus brings a new perspective to the Court of Henry VIII. What a marvelous first book this is! One can't help but look forward to many more such works from this young, talented historian.

2 comments about A Brief History of British Kings and Queens: British Royal History from Alfred the Great to the Present (Brief History, The).

1. With individual portraits of all the kings of Britain, no one could accuse this of incompleteness, but the solemn tone and lengthy paragraphs make for a rather dry read.
   
   Billed as from "Alfred the Great to the Present" it begins long before Alfred, with overviews of the Celts, the Roman Occupation, and the Dark Ages. Ashley's organising principle, unity versus disunity within Britain, results in some confusing arrangement of material. For example, in the first Section, Kingdom Against Kingdom: Early Britain: after "The House of Normandy 1066-1154" he backtracks several hundred years to the Kingdoms of Wales (500-1240) and Scotland (850-1165). Then the narrative resumes in 1154 with The House of Anjou.

   This mine of information, though daunting at first glance, covers monarchs' appearance, character, consorts, political, social, religious and cultural history. Among 100 pages of appendices are lists of Roman emperors and governors, kings of British provinces, royal consorts, family trees. The massive bibliography, handy for historic royal watchers, precedes the index.

   You would probably want something more snappy and anecdotal on your shelf as well as this. However it's worth investing in as a reference source.




2. This author assumes that the reader lives in the UK and you happen to know where all the regions are located (I had to keep glancing at the maps). The interesting thing though is that he covers all monarchs from like 100 BC and all regions, but I ended up just skipping all those parts as I couldn't pronounce the names or the places (especially the welsh names how the heck to do you say "ap" or is this an abbreviation for something?). Also he covers each one so quickly you can't even get the chronology straight in your head. The book does have good geneological and chronological tables though. "Brief" is exactly information the book gives.

5 comments about While My Guitar Gently Weeps : The Music of George Harrison.

1. Finally, someone analyzes George's musical catologue with the scholarly insight it deserves. Simon Leng understands how to connect the events in George's life to his artistic endeavors. Mr. Leng ably demonstrates that he has pondered long & hard about George's majestic contributions to twentieth century arts and beyond. Bravo.



2. This is a pretty good book. Unlike it's competitor, or companion "here Comes the Sun", this book is coming from a primarily music-analysis point of view, rather than a spiritual hagiography/biography. The analysis is pretty much song by song and focuses mainly on his solo albums, not his Beatles work, so anyone who wants to read about the first and early forays into Indian music will not find it here- that said, he does go into detail about the people who worked closely with George in the production of all his work (including the introductions to Ravi Shankar and some of the faces behind the scenes).
   I liked this book- if I had to pick one or the other of the two competing
   "musical histories" I would choose this one, if only because while it recognizes George's spiritual quest could not be divorced from his music, it focuses on the mechanics of that music rather than the personalities of (and the followers of) the "spiritual masters" he encountered on the way.



3. The review title refers to the monumental critical analysis by Ian MacDonald, Revolution in the Head: The Beatles' Records and the Sixties, which this book closely resembles both in structure and style. I think it is, in a word, AWESOME that a solid critical appreciation of George Harrison's entire body of work has been issued. Simon Leng has done a truly commendable job of treating Harrison's solo discography with the respect and attention is deserves. There is, in fact, much more to George's post-Beatles ouput than "All Things Must Pass" (though that is certainly the peak of his accomplishments) and Mr. Leng offers opinions of it all, song by song.
   
   As with the Ian MacDonald work, this book is written by someone who is obviously a major fan - but not a fanboy. A clear-eyed objectivity is (more or less) maintained as Leng analyzes Harrison's music. I didn't agree with every single opinion of every single song - but it did inspire me to relisten to George's music from a different perspective. Ultimately, I believe that's exactly what this type of book should do. The focus is squarely on the music (though some biographical information is included in between discussing the albums, which is welcome - especially since George's career isn't as well known or documented as Lennon and McCartney's).
   
   If you're a longtime fan of Harrison's work, you're likely to find something new to listen for. If you're a newcomer, you're likely to want to immediately acquire any of music you aren't familiar with.



4. This book provides an insightful description and analysis of Harrison's music and his era. It's really an achievement. Leng is a mature, sensitive and intelligent writer: his knowledge of Harrison and his wonderful music is evident, as is his affection for the subject. Leng traces Harrison's solo work, how it evolved and why. He also places Harrison's work in context: Can you imagine a time when songs about peace, love and spiritual yearning topped the pop charts? And if you are just a bit too young to know why, say, Bob Dylan, was such a big deal, then read this book. Harrison's music and his spiritual growth were a big deal, too, and rightfully so - and Leng should be commended for recognizing and illuminating this.



5. If you're a Beatles fan, there are so many books that discuss their music that a newcomer could easily be paralyzed by the sheer volume of choices. If you are a GEORGE HARRISON fan, however, there are relatively few books available, and this is a good thing, because Simon Leng's "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" is all you need for critical analysis of his work. The book moves chronologically, skimming over the Beatles years and digging in around 1969, when George became a solo artist and producer-for-hire. Each album is discussed, track by track, and unreleased recordings and guest spots for other artists are also covered. The original hardcover first came out in 2001, so get the newer softcover, which received a considerable re-write and is updated for George's final album, "Brainwashed." Leng is clearly a George fan, and he does fawn and over-defend some lesser work, but the book is still an invaluable guide to the underrated solo career of the Quiet Beatle.

1 comments about Spymistress: The Life of Vera Atkins, the Greatest Female Secret Agent of World War II.

1. The author of Spymistress states that Vera Atkins had "lustrous black hair" whereas in fact she was a blue-eyed blonde, as anyone who ever met her could have told him.
   If the author cannot get the colour of his subject's hair right it is hardly surprising that much of the rest of the book turns out to be nonsense too. The fantasies woven here have no interest. The author trivialises a great woman's life story. He does so in the knowledge that the dead cannot answer back.
   The true story of Vera Atkins's life is far more compelling than anything in this book. I know this because I spent five years researching her extraordinary story across the world. I interviewed her at length before she died and I had sole access to her archive.
   I am writing this review not to promote my own book but to defend Vera's integrity. This false "biography" desecrates the memory of a remarkable woman, misses the real story entirely, and brings the American publishing industry into disrepute. In short, it is a publishing farce.

5 comments about After Elizabeth: The Rise of James of Scotland and the Struggle For the Throne of England.

1. LOVED THE STORY LINE AUTHOR IS GREAT IN THE DETAILS OF HIS WRITING



2. I found this short history tedious. I could not immerse myself in it and often found myself putting the book down out of boredom so that it took me much longer to read than many longer histories I've read in the past.
   
   I believe the main problem is that the author condenses too many characters in the space without rounding the characters out; I do not find myself interested in them because they appear wooden...not enough insight into their personalities and not enough color given to their backgrounds. I feel the author's past as a journalist has influenced her here. She can write volumes of information, but it doesn't seem to engage the reader on a deeper lever than a newspaper story might.
   
   I enjoy Christopher Hibbert and Alison Weir more. They convey complex historical events with a gift for giving the reader a feeling for the time and they have an ability to communicate characters on more of a flesh-and-blood level. Too bad. I was looking forward to the book.



3. Linda de Lisle has undertaken a tremendous amount of research before setting pen to paper - that is quite obvious. Her problem, however, is that she begins to stumble when it comes to meash this wealth of information into a narrative that keeps the reader's interest and retains coherence. This is a difficult task, and with new players entering the scene at regular intervals, a substantial challenge. De Lisle has made a sterling effort, and succeeds in getting the message across that James' succession to the throne of England was all but a forgone conclusion. However, it is a difficult book to read, and one requires a lot of patience and time to do so. I am inclined to say that it is worth the effort, but it requires more stamina than it should.



4. I read this book with great pleasure. I am a big fan of Elizabeth I, and this book gave a very detailed look at the end of her reign as well as the struggle for James I to get the throne after her. If you like this kind of history, this book is a must read!



5. Queen Elizabeth (1533-1603) the "Virgin Queen" ruled England from 1553-1558 following the death of her half sister Mary Queen of Scots (reigned from 1553-1558). Mary won the nickname "Bloody Mary" due to her burning of Protestants at the stake. She was an ardent Catholic wed to Phillip II of Spain. Elizabeth was the daughter of the executed Anne Boleyn and the behemoth tyrant Henry VIII. As a young person she often lived in fear of being executed. She was at one time a prison in the infamous Tower of London. Elizabeth was vain but a good ruler guided by wise counselors. She never married but had close male friends.
   Elizabeth is nearing death in 1603. The realm is near bankruptcy, the court is corrupt and Catholics are being persecuted. Elizabeth had to execute Mary Queen of Scots in 1587 fearing she will support a Catholic invansion of England. Elizabeth began her decline after the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1558. A plot by her young favorite the Earl of Essex had been extinguished and he was executed.
   Following the death of Elizabeth, James VI the King of Scotland and son of Mary Queen of Scots was crowned King of England. He was opposed by several factions which are described in great detail by the author. Scotland was a tough and brutal nation where bandits and clan warfare were the norm. The major foes to James' accession were:
   1, Supporters of Arbella Stuart a relative of Elizabeth.
   2. Jesuits and secular Catholic priests who wanted to restore the nation to the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholics were also busy fighting one another.
   3. Supporters of the deceased Earl of Essex who wanted to bring the Tudor monarchy to an end.
   One of the themes of this 300 page book is that the perception that James had an easy road to the crown is fallacious. Heads roled as conspiracies were discovered including that of the famous Sir Walter Raleigh. Raleigh was charged with conspiring with Spain to bring down James.
   DeLisle comes to the following conclusions about James I
   (1603-1625).
   1. He was a positive force in reforming the English church. During his reign the King James Version of the Bible was translated in 1611. The Protestant clergy was reformed with better educated preachers in pulpits. There was no offical toleration of Roman Catholicism. James favored the Protestant cause even though his wife Anne was a Roman Catholic.
   2. He kept the peace.
   3. James failed in his efforts to call an ecumenical council to reconcile Roman Catholics and Protestants.
   4. James also failed to unite England, Ireland and Scotland into the Great Britain we know today. He, nevertheless, made an effort to achieve this worthy goal.
   5. James may have suffered from cerebal palsy, attention deficit disorder and alcoholism. He was probably bisexual and had male favorites at court including George Villiers.
   6. James had a brilliant mind but was often cold and standoffish. He did not get along well with ordinary people and was not liked by the English public.
   7. He authored a book on the evils of tobacco and enjoyed music. The masque became popular during his reign. De Lisle says he was vulgar and was often crude in his conversations.
   8. James believed in the Absolute Right of Kings and was anti-democratic.
   This is a good first book by the English author/journalist L. De Lisle.
   One looks forward to her future books.

No comments about Oliver Cromwell (Very Interesting People S.).

2 comments about Yale English Monarchs - Queen Anne (The English Monarchs Series).

1. During Queen Anne's reign Britain consolidated its position as a first rank
   European power. Prior to that England had been the doughty underdog, who
   somehow survived to trade another day, its politics plagued with factions and bloody
   divisions. During Anne's reign the divisions persisted, but was worked out with less
   bloody consequences.

   Professor Gregg's was allowed access to the large volume of correspondence between
   Anne and her one time close friend Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough. The Duke and Duchess of Marlborough were the power couple of the period. The Duke won great military victories for Britain on the continent and the Duchess was very influential in the early years of Queen Annes' rule. So the correspondence is very revealing of the twists and turns of the political process. Anne could only rule through parliament, and being childless (despite sixteen pregnancies!) was
   susceptible to pressure as to who should succeed her. Her father, James II, a Catholic, had been deposed and was living in exile in France, where he had the support of Louis XIV. The next nearest Protestant relative was George Augustus of Hannover, a rather dour, provincial potentate. Through the later
   years of her reign, Anne struggled with parliament to establish her own authority, limit the power of Louis XIV in Europe, secure the Protestant succession and
   simultaneously deter the George Augustus from coming to Britain while she lived - this last was necessary to stop a rival power structure emerging. This was done against the backdrop of increasing expensive military campaigns and a country which was sentimentally attached to the Stuarts and neutral about the Hannovarians. The struggles within parliament and between parliament and the court are well described by Professor Gregg, who is especially good at describing the rather-stoic Anne's stuggle to establish her authority. The early letters to the Duchess of Marlborough are unusually revealing of her struggle to assert herself.

   If the book has a weakness it is the over-reliance on these letters. The friendship between Anne and Sarah soured considerably, as Anne took more and more
   decisions which contradicted Sarah's advice. Eventually Anne turned to a number of
   other advisors, however correspondence with these others is much more limited, while Sarah continued to inundated Anne with increasingly shrill correspondence. Gregg, in the absence of other documentation, quotes heavily from later correspondence between the women, even though the relevance to contemporary events diminishes.

   Overall the book is an excellent, personalized description of Annes times and life.
   By being so focussed on the monarch it gives an insight into the connections between families in the fight for preferment - several examples exist of proximity to royalty translating into high office; the father of James II's `low born' wife became the Earl of Clarendon, and Anne spent most of her reign ignoring and avoiding him. In this way it is possible to trace and understand the patterns of
   patronage and influence which make English history seem so impenetrable.

   I highly recommend this book




2. I throughly enjoyed this book by Edward Gregg. It reads well and tells a story of one of England's most misunderstood monarchs. Much of our views about Queen Anne come from that excellent British series "The First Churchills" based mostly on the memoirs of Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough. Churchill shows Queen Anne as dull, easily bullied and indecisive. In fact, as Gregg demonstrates, Anne was engaged in all aspects of British political life. She pursued a balanced policy between Whigs and Tories. Under her reign, Britain emerged as the premier military power in Europe- defeating the Sun Kings' plans to unite the Spanish and French empires into one political unit. The empire expanded to new heights. Importantly, she navigated England through a tumultous time. While stubborn, like most Stuart monarchs, she did not display the arrogance of power that afflicted her father, James II. She appears to me to be somewhere between the pragmatism of Charles II and the implacable Mary II. Handel has written a wonderful ode about Anne "The day that gave great Anna birth, Who fix'd a lasting peace on earth." Gregg has done a wonderful job in reminding us that Queen Anne deserves better recognition as one of England's great monarchs.