Anniversary of a Death

I can't let the anniversary of the death of my favorite monarch go by without a post. This is copied from my post on the anniversary last year.

Richard III (Oct 2, 1452 - Aug 22, 1485)

On this day in 1485, the most maligned King in English history was killed at the Battle of Bosworth field. He was betrayed by some of his lords and was "piteously slain and murdered" (as is recorded in the York City records), paving the way for the usurper Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond (Henry VII). Thus began the Tudor Dynasty, based on a very weak and illegitimate claim to the throne, and the complete destruction of Richard's reputation.

The battle was mainly a hand-to-hand encounter (which was typical of the times), with the Stanley family (who had promised Tudor that they would desert Richard) keeping away from the fight until, at a critical moment when it was obvious which way the victory was headed, they joined Tudor. Richard, realizing that he was betrayed, cried out, "Treason, treason!" He knew he'd either leave as the King of England or dead and refused to leave the field until, overpowered by numbers, he fell dead in the middle of his enemies. He came very close to dispatching his enemy, Henry Tudor, killing his standard barer, William Brandon (the father of Henry VIII's close friend, Charles Brandon). Even his enemies had to admit that he fought with courage (Tudor's historian even wrote that "King Richard, alone, was killed fighting manfully in the thickest press of his enemies"). The crown was supposedly picked up on the field of battle and placed by Sir William Stanley on the head of Tudor, who was at once proclaimed king by the whole army. After the battle Richard's body was taken to Leicester, carried naked across a horse's back, and buried without honor in the church of the Greyfriars. His death was the end of the Plantagenet Dynasty which had ruled England since the succession of Henry II in 1154. In a twist which can tell us a lot about the man who benefited from Richard's death, Tudor dated his reign from the day BEFORE the battle so he could charge all the men who had fought for an anointed and crowned king with treason.

Richard most likely was not the villain that his enemies made him out to appear. He had good qualities (and bad qualities), both as a man and a ruler, and seemed to have a sound judgment of political needs (he had been able to keep the North of England in peace for his brother). In testament to those ideas, a historian of the time, John Rous said he was a "good lord" and had a "great heart" (though he changed his tune once Tudor was on the throne). And the city of York, after hearing of Richard's defeat at Bosworth, risked the fury of the new monarch by entering into it's city council records "king Richard late mercifully reigning upon us ... was piteously slane murdred to the grete hevynesse of this citie." However, it is impossible to convict or clear him of the deaths of his nephews, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, in the Tower of London. He was not a monster but a typical man in an age of strange contradictions of character, an age of refined (for the day) culture mixed with horrible cruelty, and he possessed an emotional temper that was capable of anything (he was a Plantagenet after all).  After his defeat at Bosworth, Tudor and his supporters needed to solidify his claim to the throne and what better way to do that than to make the English people think that the King he replaced was a deformed, evil monster who killed his own nephews? No one did more to cement that belief than William Shakespeare with his play Richard III (Undoubtedly writing to please the Tudors but getting HIS information from Thomas Moore who was only 5 when the events actually occurred; Moore's information came from Bishop Morton, who hated Richard.). They were hugely successful in their endeavors and, unfortunately, this view of Richard stuck until probably the 20th century when scholars really began to study him. Tradition represents Richard as a hunchback but there were no contemporary accounts of him being "deformed." The discovery of Richard's skeleton under the car park in Leicester proved that he was NOT a hunchback (like Shakespeare made everyone believe) but

had scoliosis, which made his fighting ability that much more amazing as he was probably in quite a lot of pain. The discovery also showed that he had multiple wounds all over his body (including one on his "backside") that shows that his body was not treated with any dignity. While the discovery of his body can't confirm or deny the story that he murdered his nephews, it certainly shows that not everything that has been handed down through history is exactly accurate. If Shakespeare's hunchbacked Richard wasn't true, what else may not be true? Many have popped up in the last few months questioning the dig and discovery by the University of Leicester, saying, among other things, that the entire dig was a hoax and this isn't Richard's body. I for one believe that it IS the last York King of England and am looking forward to his reburial in Leicester Cathedral next year.

Loyaulte me lie

Richard III, Last Plantagenet King of England

Richard III (Oct 2, 1452 - Aug 22, 1485)

On this day in 1485, the most maligned King in English history was killed at the Battle of Bosworth field. He was betrayed by some of his lords and was "piteously slain and murdered" (as is recorded in the York City records), paving the way for the usurper Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond (Henry VII). Thus began the Tudor Dynasty, based on a very weak and illegitimate claim to the throne, and the complete destruction of Richard's reputation.

The battle was mainly a hand-to-hand encounter (which was typical of the times), with the Stanley family (who had promised Tudor that they would desert Richard) keeping away from the fight until, at a critical moment when it was obvious which way the victory was headed, they joined Tudor. Richard, realizing that he was betrayed, cried out, "Treason, treason!" He knew he'd either leave as the King of England or dead and refused to leave the field until, overpowered by numbers, he fell dead in the middle of his enemies. He came very close to dispatching his enemy, Henry Tudor, killing his standard barer, William Brandon (the father of Henry VIII's close friend, Charles Brandon). Even his enemies had to admit that he fought with courage (Tudor's historian even wrote that "King Richard, alone, was killed fighting manfully in the thickest press of his enemies"). The crown was supposedly picked up on the field of battle and placed by Sir William Stanley on the head of Tudor, who was at once proclaimed king by the whole army. After the battle Richard's body was taken to Leicester, carried naked across a horse's back, and buried without honor in the church of the Greyfriars. His death was the end of the Plantagenet Dynasty which had ruled England since the succession of Henry II in 1154. In a twist which can tell us a lot about the man who benefited from Richard's death, Tudor dated his reign from the day BEFORE the battle so he could charge all the men who had fought for an anointed and crowned king with treason.

Richard most likely was not the villain that his enemies made him out to appear. He had good qualities (and bad qualities), both as a man and a ruler, and seemed to have a sound judgment of political needs (he had been able to keep the North of England in peace for his brother). In testament to those ideas, a historian of the time, John Rous said he was a "good lord" and had a "great heart" (though he changed his tune once Tudor was on the throne). And the city of York, after hearing of Richard's defeat at Bosworth, risked the fury of the new monarch by entering into it's city council records "king Richard late mercifully reigning upon us ... was piteously slane murdred to the grete hevynesse of this citie." However, it is impossible to convict or clear him of the deaths of his nephews, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, in the Tower of London. He was not a monster but a typical man in an age of strange contradictions of character, an age of refined (for the day) culture mixed with horrible cruelty, and he possessed an emotional temper that was capable of anything (he was a Plantagenet after all).  After his defeat at Bosworth, Tudor and his supporters needed to solidify his claim to the throne and what better way to do that than to make the English people think that the King he replaced was a deformed, evil monster who killed his own nephews? No one did more to cement that belief than William Shakespeare with his play Richard III (Undoubtedly writing to please the Tudors but getting HIS information from Thomas Moore who was only 5 when the events actually occurred; Moore's information came from Bishop Morton, who hated Richard.). They were hugely successful in their endeavors and, unfortunately, this view of Richard stuck until probably the 20th century when scholars really began to study him. Tradition represents Richard as a hunchback but there were no contemporary accounts of him being "deformed." The discovery of Richard's skeleton under the car park in Leicester proved that he was NOT a hunchback (like Shakespeare made everyone believe) but

had scoliosis, which made his fighting ability that much more amazing as he was probably in quite a lot of pain. The discovery also showed that he had multiple wounds all over his body (including one on his "backside") that shows that his body was not treated with any dignity. While the discovery of his body can't confirm or deny the story that he murdered his nephews, it certainly shows that not everything that has been handed down through history is exactly accurate. If Shakespeare's hunchbacked Richard wasn't true, what else may not be true?

Loyaulte me lie

Richard III...Found

In honor of the momentous and historical announcement this week that the body of Richard III has been found...

I have been bouncing off the walls with excitement and joy at the discovery of my favorite King (and the discovery that he was NOT a deformed hunchback like the Tudors wanted people to believe). He will now receive a burial and tomb proper for an anointed King of England. I can not wait to visit England and his new tomb in Leicester Cathedral.

Rest in Peace Richard

Richard III (Oct 2, 1452 - Aug 22, 1485)

On this day in 1485, the most maligned King in English history was killed at the Battle of Bosworth field. He was betrayed by some of his lords and was "piteously slain and murdered" (as is recorded in the York City records), paving the way for the usurper Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond (Henry VII). Thus began the Tudor Dynasty, based on a very weak and illegitimate claim to the throne, and the complete destruction of Richard's reputation.

The battle was mainly a hand-to-hand encounter (which was typical of the times), with the Stanley family (who had promised Tudor that they would desert Richard) keeping away from the fight until, at a critical moment when it was obvious which way the victory was headed, they joined Tudor. Richard, realizing that he was betrayed, cried out, "Treason, treason!" He knew he'd either leave as the King of England or dead and refused to leave the field until, overpowered by numbers, he fell dead in the middle of his enemies. He came very close to dispatching his enemy, Henry Tudor, killing his standard barer, William Brandon (the father of Henry VIII's close friend, Charles Brandon). The crown was supposedly picked up on the field of battle and placed by Sir William Stanley on the head of Tudor, who was at once proclaimed king by the whole army. After the battle Richard's body was carried to Leicester, carried naked across a horse's back, and buried without honor in the church of the Greyfriars. His death was the end of the Plantagenet Dynasty which had ruled England since the succession of Henry II in 1154.

Richard was not the villain that his enemies made him out to appear. He had good qualities, both as a man and a ruler, and seemed to have a sound judgment of political needs (he had been able to keep the North of England in peace for his brother). However, it is impossible to clear him of the crime, the popular belief that was mostly likely the chief cause of his ruin - the death of his nephews, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, in the Tower of London. He was not a monster but a typical man in an age of strange contradictions of character, an age of refined (for the day) culture mixed with horrible cruelty, and he possessed an emotional temper that was capable of anything (he was a Plantagenet after all). Tradition represents Richard as deformed but this has never been proven. After his defeat at Bosworth, Tudor and his supporters needed to solidify his claim to the throne and what better way to do that than to make the English people think that the King he replaced was a deformed, evil monster who killed his own nephews? No one did more to cement that belief than William Shakespeare with his play Richard III (who was undoubtedly writing to please the Tudors). They were hugely successful in their endeavors and, unfortunately, this view of Richard stuck until probably the 20th century when scholars really began to study him.

Loyaulte me lie

Mailbox Monday - March 19, 2012

Mailbox Monday is now on tour! It is being hosted this month by Diary of an Eccentric. To find out more about the history of Mailbox Monday and a list of future hosts visit the Mailbox Monday site.

Mailbox Monday is a gathering place for readers to share the books that came into their house last week and explore great book blogs. Warning: Mailbox Monday can lead to envy, toppling TBR piles, and humongous wish lists!

Two new ones this week!

Rose of York: Love and War, Sandra Worth

This is book one in the author's York trilogy and I've been waiting for over a year to get to the top of the waiting list on Paperbackswap.com so I could read this book. Now to wait for the other ones...







The Three Colonels, Jack Caldwell

I received this one for review from Sourcebooks. It is about some of Austen's "fighting men" and looks pretty interesting.

Book Review: The Adventures of Alianore Audley

The Adventures of Alianore Audley
4 roses

If you are familiar with the Wars of the Roses and love a good laugh now and then, Brian Wainwright's humorous tale of the fictional Alianore Audley will be right up your alley! I received this tale from Paperbackswap.com after waiting (not so patiently I might add!) to get to the head of the waiting list! I think I read it in a night or two, it was that easy and fun to read.

I am not going to rehash everything that happens in the turbulent period as many of my readers are familiar with it anyway and I don't have the motivation to type it all out right now. However, to get most of the jokes and tongue in cheek writing you probably need to have at least a passing knowledge of the events of the period. The author manages to weave facts about the period with humor and more modern (and to some, understandable) words and expressions, creating a really fun romp through the 15th century. Mr. Wainwright places Alianore right in the middle of the action where she unknowingly (or knowingly in a lot of cases!) does something that causes many of the "big" events we know from history to actually happen (such as accidentally revealing where the Princes are to Bishop Morton). Alianore is a staunch Yorkist supporter (and distant cousin) and becomes a spy for Edward IV and then for his brother Richard III and eventually finds herself at the helm of a Medieval version of the CIA! Alianore's character is hysterical with her dry humor and (very) quick wit. She can be quite bawdy at times as well. Her thoughts and opinions on the people around her are hilarious.

I highly recommend this novel to those that are familiar with the period; you will get a laugh out of most of it. I'm not saying you're going to be falling out of your chair because you're laughing so hard throughout all 200 or so pages, but you certainly are going to be amused! Mr. Wainwright really shows off his knowledge of the period in this fun parody.

The Richard III Project

Readers of this blog will know my love and admiration for Richard III. I have longed for a new movie or TV show to be made about this King to "clear the air" and show him more like he might have been - instead of the monster Shakespeare and his Tudor contemporaries have made him.

British actor Richard Armitage has dreamed of making a film about Richard III and needs our help! He has a site set up and a petition to possible financiers to try to turn his dream into a reality. Please click the link below to go to the website and the link to the petition is near the top!

King Richard Armitage

You will find information about Richard Armitage and Richard III (who he is named for) at the site. You can also find information about Richard III here on my blog in several places.

Next Philippa Gregory Release Announced!

Continuing in her "Cousins War" series, Philippa Gregory's next novel The Kingmaker's Daughter will be released August 7, 2012.

For those of you unfamiliar with this time period, the "Kingmaker" was Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick. He helped place Edward IV on the throne and then later rebelled against him. The novel will be about his daughters Isabella and Anne. Both sisters married younger brothers of Edward IV: Isabella to George, Duke of Clarance, and Anne to Richard, Duke of Gloucester (future Richard III).

Followers of this blog know my partiality for Richard III and so I will be looking forward to this book, though with a bit of caution. I am always nervous when I don't know how an author is going to portray my favorite King! Richard appeared in the first novel in this series The Winter Queen, which covered the life of Elizabeth Woodville, and she did not make him out to be a horrible monster so I have some hope for this novel!

If you are interested the other novels in this series (in order of release date) are:

The Winter Queen (Elizabeth Woodville, wife to Edward IV)
The Red Queen (Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII)
Lady of the Rivers (Jaquetta Woodville, Elizabeth's mother)

Rest in Peace Richard

Richard III (Oct 2, 1452 - Aug 22, 1485)

On this day in 1485, the most maligned King in English history was killed at the Battle of Bosworth field. He was betrayed by some of his lords and was "piteously slain and murdered" (as is recorded in the York City records), paving the way for the usurper Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond (Henry VII). Thus began the Tudor Dynasty, based on a very weak and illegitimate claim to the throne, and the complete destruction of Richard's reputation.

The battle was mainly a hand-to-hand encounter (which was typical of the times), with the Stanley family (who had promised Tudor that they would desert Richard) keeping away from the fight until, at a critical moment when it was obvious which way the victory was headed, they joined Tudor. Richard, realizing that he was betrayed, cried out, "Treason, treason!" He knew he'd either leave as the King of England or dead and refused to leave the field until, overpowered by numbers, he fell dead in the middle of his enemies. He came very close to dispatching his enemy, Henry Tudor, killing his standard barer, William Brandon (the father of Henry VIII's close friend, Charles Brandon). The crown was supposedly picked up on the field of battle and placed by Sir William Stanley on the head of Tudor, who was at once proclaimed king by the whole army. After the battle Richard's body was carried to Leicester, carried naked across a horse's back, and buried without honor in the church of the Greyfriars. His death was the end of the Plantagenet Dynasty which had ruled England since the succession of Henry II in 1154.

Richard was not the villain that his enemies made him out to appear. He had good qualities, both as a man and a ruler, and seemed to have a sound judgment of political needs (he had been able to keep the North of England in peace for his brother). However, it is impossible to clear him of the crime, the popular belief that was mostly likely the chief cause of his ruin - the death of his nephews, Edward V and Richard, Duke of York, in the Tower of London. He was not a monster but a typical man in an age of strange contradictions of character, an age of refined (for the day) culture mixed with horrible cruelty, and he possessed an emotional temper that was capable of anything (he was a Plantagenet after all). Tradition represents Richard as deformed but this has never been proven. After his defeat at Bosworth, Tudor and his supporters needed to solidify his claim to the throne and what better way to do that than to make the English people think that the King he replaced was a deformed, evil monster who killed his own nephews? No one did more to cement that belief than William Shakespeare with his play Richard III (who was undoubtedly writing to please the Tudors). They were hugely successful in their endeavors and, unfortunately, this view of Richard stuck until probably the 20th century when scholars really began to study him.

Loyaulte me lie

Book Review: The Virgin Widow

The Virgin Widow, Anne O'Brien
3.5 roses

Being the die hard Ricardian that I am, this book about his wife Anne Neville caught my eye and I had to see how this author treated my favorite historical male. While there are almost an unending supply of novels focusing on the Wars of the Roses and Richard III, I know of only one that focuses on Anne and her life (Plaidy's The Reluctant Queen). Ms. O'Brien's novel focuses on Anne's early years and her relationships with the various (and major) players in the Wars of the Roses. I was not disappointed but I wasn't blown away by any stretch.

I am not going to rehash the ins and outs of the Wars of the Roses here (if anyone wants to know there is endless information available on the internet). The narrator of the novel is Anne Neville, a figure well known to readers of historical fiction: daughter of the Earl of Warwick (the Kingmaker), widow of Edward of Lancaster, and wife of Richard, Duke of Gloucester (Richard III). However, that is pretty much all that is known about the daughter of the most powerful Earl in England and one time Queen of England. We follow her through her youth at Middleham where she meets Richard, her father's quarrels with Edward IV, their exile to France and her disastrous marriage to Edward of Lancaster (son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou), the drama surrounding the issue of her inheritance, and her marriage to Richard. Ms. O'Brien has attempted to "fill in the gaps" and has created a voice for Anne which I did not find too unbelievable. Whereas in many novels about Richard, Anne comes across rather quiet, sickly, and insignificant, Ms. O'Brien's Anne is feisty, opinionated, and passionate; this Anne has a backbone which most other interpretations lack. Women during this time period are usually seen as being quite passive with little to no say so in what happens to them and while O'Brien's Anne is well aware that she has no choice and must do as she is told, she certainly has a strong opinion on what is happening to her and to those around her. I found this look at Anne rather interesting. I have to admit that my heart went out to her during the marriage to Edward of Lancaster as she endured all the humiliation heaped upon her. All that being said I did find the fact that she usually called her mother and father "the Earl" or "the Countess" a bit puzzling and her constant instance that Richard needed to declare his true feelings for her got annoying.

The author's treatment of other characters is pretty much in line with what you would expect in a novel about the time period. I did like her Richard as he was, without a doubt, Anne's "knight in shining armor" but he certainly had his flaws and ambitions. While I don't mind a "saintly" Richard, it is much easier to believe that he was a good man, with imperfections of course, and merely doing what needed to be done to survive in a very violent and ruthless time period. I am (obviously) not a fan of Margaret of Anjou or her son but the strange twist the author threw in concerning these two characters really seemed odd and just doesn't fit with history. George, Duke of Clarance, and Anne's sister Isabel, really come across as villains in the story and their behavior throughout the novel made my skin crawl. We don't see that much of Edward IV or Elizabeth Woodville and the personalities of Anne's parents aren't illuminated in much detail either (though the Earl certainly comes across as extremely ambitious).

As for the writing itself, some will not like the fact that it is told completely from Anne's point of view, restricting the author in what she could tell in the story. While I am not a huge fan of historical fiction being told in the first person (because it is so restrictive) I didn't really have a problem with it here, though that could be because I am already very familiar with the history of the period and didn't need to be told what all was happening. As in any historical fiction novel, the author has taken some liberties with known history but there wasn't really anything that made me cringe (the Margaret of Anjou/Edward of Lancaster twist the exception) or that ruined the novel for me. The narrative stops at the birth of Richard and Anne's son so a reader expecting to see Anne's thoughts on Richard's governance of the North and the drama of his reign will be disappointed (though the way it was left leaves it open for the author to continue their story in another novel). This is not a very deep novel and does not bring anything new to the table in regards to information about Anne Neville. It probably could be considered a bit more of a "historical romance" than a "historical fiction" as the main emphasis seems to be Anne and Richard's relationship.

This certainly is not a bad novel and I can easily recommend it to those unfamiliar with the Wars of the Roses and Richard III's story. It is very easy to read and you won't get bogged down in tons of details. Readers who want something more in depth will most likely be a bit disappointed. I still consider Sharon Kay Penman's The Sunne in Splendour as THE book on Richard.

Mailbox Monday

Mailbox Monday is a weekly meme originally created by Marcia at The Printed Page and is now located here. It is the gathering place for readers to share the books that came into their house last week. Warning: Mailbox Monday can lead to envy, toppling TBR piles and humongous wish lists.

Mailbox Monday is being hosted this month by The Bluestocking Guide.

Since my birthday was Sunday, I treated myself to an afternoon at the mall and dinner with a close friend. Of course, both of us being book junkies, we had to have a lengthy layover in Barnes and Noble. Here are my two purchases!


The Virgin Widow, Anne O'Brien

Being a Richard III fan I was immediately interested in reading this tale of his wife, Anne Neville. I haven't ever read anything by this author but it looked like an interesting read, especially since I don't know of any books from Anne's point of view (besides Plaidy's The Reluctant Queen).




Vlad: The Last Confession, C.C. Humphreys

This is a tale based on the life of Vlad Dracul, the inspiration for Bram Stoker's Dracula. I have never read anything about Vlad but I have seen a show on the History Channel about his life and thought this might be a very interesting read.

This Day in History...

Catching up on a few days over the weekend!

October 2, 1452 - The future Richard III is born at Fotheringay Castle.

October 3, 1283 - Welsh prince (brother to Llywelyn the Last) Dafydd ap Gruffydd is executed by Edward I. He is probably the first person to be hanged, drawn, and quartered.

October 4, 1160 - Princess Alys of France, daughter of Louis VII, was born. She would be betrothed to Prince Richard (Richard the Lionheart) for almost twenty years and possibly was his father Henry II's mistress at one point.

October 4, 1535 - Miles Coverdale, a London printer, published his English version of the Bible.

October 4, 1582 - Pope Gregory XIII implements the Gregorian calendar. In several European countries this day is followed by October 15.

The Alphabet in Historical Fiction Challenge: S

Each fortnight the ladies at Historical Tapestry will post a new letter of the alphabet and you do a blog post about a work of historical fiction that has that letter:

• as the first letter in the title
• as the first letter of the author's first or last name
• the first letter of a character's first or last name
• the first letter of a place where an historical event took place

So here is my post for the next letter of this challenge: S

The Sunne in Splendour, Sharon Kay Penman

From the back cover: In this beautifully rendered modern classic, Sharon Kay Penman redeems Richard III - vilified as the bitter, twisted, scheming hunchback who murdered his nephews, the princes in the Tower - from his maligned place in history with a dazzling combination of research and story telling.

Born into the treacherous courts of fifteenth-century England, in the midst of what history has called the War of the Roses, Richard was raised in the shadow of his charismatic brother, King Edward IV. Loyal to his friends and passionately in love with the one woman who was denied him, Richard emerges as a gifted man far more sinned against than sinning.

I honestly don't know where to start with this one! I can say that it is probably the best book I have ever read. The story begins when Richard is about seven years old and witnesses the Lancastrian sacking of Ludlow and ends a few years after his death with Elizabeth of York reminiscing. Ms. Penman does an absolutely fantastic job of refuting the generally accepted version (from Shakespeare's play) of Richard's life and personality. She gives us a human Richard, one who had fears and doubts but was unfailingly honorable and loyal. One of the things that stand out in this novel is the way Ms. Penman shows how events and people around him while he was growing up really helped shape the man Richard would ultimately become. As in all her books, her impeccable research is beyond compare and her knowledge of her subject really shows; you can tell she did her homework before writing her novel. She blends history with her storytelling so beautifully that the reader is transported to another time and place effortlessly. All of the characters in the story are wonderfully written and developed, making it seem like you are old acquaintances and could reach out and touch them. While full of detail and description, the narrative does not get weighed down or feel like you're plowing through an encyclopedia; everything is relevant, helping the story move along and giving the reader a deeper insight to not only Richard's life and personality but to the world around him which helped make him who he was. She also (thankfully) does not twist the history completely out of shape simply to fit the story she is trying to tell or include all manner of rumors just because they are sensational. She will mention in her author's note the places where she did make some changes to help the story along as well as how she developed her theories on Richard. There just is no one else who can write like Ms. Penman and tell such a remarkable story.

This is a large book but don't let that keep you from it; you will not regret the time you spend between its covers! Once you begin reading I promise you will not want to put it down. Every time I immerse myself in Penman's world I find it very difficult to pull myself away. Please look for a more in depth review on my blog in the next week.

This Day in History...

August 22, 565 - St Columba reported seeing a monster in Loch Ness in Scotland. It was the first reported sighting of the monster.

August 22, 1358 – Isabella of France, wife of Edward II, died in Norfolk.

August 22, 1485 - Richard III was defeated and killed at The Battle of Bosworth Field by Henry Tudor. He was the last English king to die in battle. His short reign is still the topic of much mystery and speculation - even now, over 500 years after his murder.

Book Review: The Red Queen

The Red Queen, Philippa Gregory
3 roses

Anyone who frequents my blog probably knows two things: I am a firm supporter of Richard III and I'm not the biggest fan of Philippa Gregory. When I saw that her second novel in The Cousins' War series would be about Henry Tudor's mother, Margaret Beaufort, I was quite anxious and worried about how Ms. Gregory would portray the entire drama and Richard. I can say, thankfully, that I have no complaints with how she showed him in this novel and, overall, it was a decent read (better, in my opinion, than the previous novel The White Queen). Having never read much about Margaret I was fairly interested to read about her early life (as I am well versed with her later years).

Margaret Beaufort was from the line descending from John of Gaunt (Edward III's son) and his mistress Katheryn Swynford (the line was eventually legitimized). She is married at 13 to Edmund Tudor but he is killed soon after, though not before managing to get Margaret pregnant. In the years after the birth of her son, whom she names Henry (high expectations already), she is married two more times, sees the reigning House of York begin to crumble, and works behind the scenes to bring her son to the throne. Everyone knows what happens at the Battle of Bosworth and that is where this novel ends. That is Margaret's history and here Gregory has stuck to known historical fact fairly decently, though I will admit, having never read too much solely on Margaret there are probably some details I would miss. However, there is nothing glaringly obvious that jumps out at me so I can say that the historical accuracy in this novel doesn't bother me like it has in so many of her other novels.

The story is told from Margaret's point of view and I feel that severely limits the story. She (Margaret) is always in England and usually at a manor in the country so not around all the momentous events that occur throughout the time frame of the story. Gregory resorts to conveying important information in letters from Margaret to various people - Henry, Jasper Tudor, etc. - in order to get her readers up to speed on what is happening beyond Margaret's sphere at the time. This really bugged me for the sole reason that someone as intelligent as Margaret would never have committed such treasonous ideas to paper and, to top it off, signed her name to it. I understand Gregory's need to fill the readers in and writing the story from a third person point of view would have solved this problem easily. Towards the end of the novel there are several chapters where she does switch to this POV out of necessity (battlefield scenes) and the story flows much better and is quite well written. Gregory has her take on what happened to the Princes in the Tower and I have no qualms with the way she portrayed the entire episode. What I do have an issue with is Margaret herself. I knew I was most likely not going to like her when, in the first few paragraphs of the novel, she is thrilled to have "saint's knees" at the age of nine and then soon likens herself as England's Joan of Arc. I have no doubt that Margaret Beaufort was a pious woman (it is well recorded actually) but I can not stand being constantly beat over the head with the information. This is an issue I have had with a few of Gregory's books. On almost every page of the novel Margaret is either mentioning how she sees herself as a Joan of Arc, sent from God to "rescue" England or discussing how because she is so pious and godly that her will must be the will of God, that she was sent from God to put Henry on the throne. This got old very, very quickly and mix that in with her arrogance and ambition and I disliked her from beginning to end. There was one moment when I wanted to clap and cheer that she finally got the right idea (when she was wondering if it wasn't all God's will but her own ambitions that she was acting on) but she soon talked herself out of that. I understand that she was an ambitious woman but it really seemed over the top to me. Beyond Margaret's ambitions and scheming to put Henry on the throne, there really is not much else to the story. Because the entire novel is basically from Margaret's point of view we really do not get a look at many of the other people that play such an important part in the story. There are, of course, scenes between Margaret and various people through out, but we really don't get a good look at these characters or what makes them tick. I think my favorite scene in the entire novel was the one between Margaret and Elizabeth of York. I loved the spunk Gregory gives the young princess and her parting comment to Margaret, after she has tried tirelessly to make the princess feel inferior, is priceless:

"Yes, but either way, shamed or not, I shall be Queen of England, and this is the last time you will sit in my presence."

The exception to this limitation would be the final few chapters where Gregory switches to a third person narrative and we see Henry and Jasper Tudor. I thoroughly enjoyed these few chapters (though I always hate the outcome) and I actually liked her portrayal of Henry Tudor. I got the feeling that he was much less impressed with his Lancaster "inheritance" (England's crown) than his mother and wasn't overly worried if he was King or not. It almost seemed like the classic case of "child doing something only because his parents want him to" - almost like Henry was only invading England and fighting Richard because his mother wanted him to be King, not because he really wanted to be or felt he had a right to it. I was prepared to hate Henry as Richard's killer but Gregory wrote him in such a way that I actually like him. It certainly throws a new light on him.

Overall I can say I enjoyed the novel more than the previous one about Elizabeth Woodville. There were, of course, things that irritated me but it wasn't a bad read. It doesn't bring any new information to the table but what was included was interesting. I think readers who want a little more background on how the Tudors came to power but aren't ready for some of the more detail heavy novels will really enjoy this; it would certainly be a good starting point if you're wanting to learn about the period. Serious Ricardians may not like it as it is told from the view point of the woman who helped take his throne. The story moves at a decent pace and it certainly covers a very dramatic time period in English history. I like the fact that it is about someone who writers usually doesn't spend too much time discussing. Gregory's next novel in the Cousins' War series will be about Jacquetta Woodville, Elizabeth Woodville's mother. She also plans on a novel about Anne and Isabelle Neville (Anne was Richard III's wife).


*Thank you to the publisher, Simon and Schuster for the early review opportunity.

This Day in History...

July 12, 1472 - Richard, Duke of Gloucester married Lady Anne Neville, daughter of the Earl of Warwick. They lived at Middleham until he became king.

July 12, 1543 - Henry VIII married his sixth wife Catherine Parr at Hampton Court Palace. All three of his children were present.

This Day in History...

July 6, 1189 – Henry II died in France and is buried at Fontevrault Abbey. His son Richard became King of England.

July 6, 1483 - Richard III was formally crowned King of England. His reign would end a little over 2 years later.

July 6, 1535 - Sir Thomas More was beheaded for refusing to accept Henry VIII as head of the church.

July 6, 1553 – Edward VI, son of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour, died at Greenwich Palace. He was just 16 years old.

July 6, 1553 - Mary I, daughter of Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon, acceded to the throne. She was the first queen to rule England in her own right.

This Day in History...

June 26, 1483 - Richard III is proclaimed King of England. Sadly, he would only reign for a little over 2 years and is clouded with mystery.

This Day in History...

June 11, 1184 BC - According to calculations by Eratosthenes, this is the day that the city of Troy was sacked and burned.

June 11, 1183 - Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine's oldest son, Henry, died. This made Richard the heir to the English throne.

June 11, 1381 - Wat Tyler led the peasants of Southern England in a march to London. This was the first popular rebellion in English history.

June 11, 1456 - Anne Neville, daughter of the Earl of Warwick, is born. She would later become the wife of Richard III.

June 11, 1488 - James III of Scotland was murdered by rebellious Scottish nobles. He was succeeded by his 15 year old son, James IV.

June 11, 1509 - An eighteen year old Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragon, his brother Arthur's widow. He would regret this decision 20 years later when she had failed to produce a male heir and he wanted to marry Anne Boleyn.

Mailbox Monday - May 3, 2010

Mailbox Monday is a weekly bookish meme hosted by Marcia at The Printed Page. It is the gathering place for readers to share the books that came into their house last week (checked out library books don’t count). Warning: Mailbox Monday can lead to envy, toppling TBR piles and humongous wish lists!

Got a few this past week. Yay! I really need a new (and bigger) bookshelf!


Charlotte and Emily: A Novel of the Brontes, Jude Morgan

Picked this one up at Borders the day it was released. It came highly recommended so I am looking forward to delving into this one.





The Time Traveler's Guide to Medieval England, Ian Mortimer

How could you pass up a book like this??? I didn't want to spend that much on a hardcover book but really, I just HAD to have it! This should come in handy actually for one of my WIPs.




Royal Blood, Bertram Fields

I have been waiting anxiously for this one and it finally arrived from Paperbackswap! I am so excited to read this!