|
|
I think that this was largely a mediocre book, to start off with, mostly due to the fact that it was a romance novel in unlikely historical trappings.
Ostensibly, this novel is about Joan, the “Fair Maid of Kent”, who we all know from the history and the title of the novel is going to marry Edward the Black Prince (of Wales). I was hoping for a more detailed fictional take on her life. Instead, I got a romance novel. I did expect some romance, because it is obviously about how she and Edward fall in love in part, but Joan’s life had a lot going on otherwise and I felt that was de-emphasized in favor of the fact that she is constantly pining for Edward.
Okay, historical inaccuracies: namely, neither Joan nor Edward were known by their nicknames during their lifetime, and anyone who has done any research will notice that there is no contemporary record of their names. Moreover, the chronology of Joan’s life is inaccurate. Some unlikely elements were added in favor of the plot, but it’s mostly the blatant inaccuracies, which are so frequently used.
Secondly, this is basically a romance novel. When Joan’s life doesn’t have much to do with Edward, it is skipped over, except when one particular exciting event happens. And (spoilers here) the novel ends with the marriage of Joan and Edward. What about afterwards? I would have been far more interested to learn how Joan thought while Edward was off winning victories and how she acted with her children and what happened after Edward died. I thought the novel would be more of a fictionalized biography, because that’s how it comes off by reading the back. It isn’t, it’s just a romance novel.
In the end, I would call this mediocre, and probably recommend it to someone who reads romance novels, not historical fiction. It doesn’t do badly as a romance, but it pretends to be something that it isn’t.
In Harold the King, Helen Hollick deals with the seldom-fictionalized Anglo-Saxons, which I enjoyed very much. She is very historically accurate throughout, creating well-fleshed-out characters that I can believe existed and had motives for the occasionally horrendous things that they did. The story moved at a fair pace, considering the book covers approximately 20 years, and I was never bored. For readers who know little of English history beyond the famous Battle of Hastings, this book provides a painless recounting of how such a conflict came to be.
The characters even suffer internal conflict, and one can trace the development of, for example, Edith, from a spoiled young girl to a twisted, selfish queen. It is fairly easy to see where the characters are coming from. This is one of the things that I’m always looking for; are characters believable? Do I understand their doubts and fears? This book pulls that off nicely.
The prose, however, is a bit awkward. Hollick is a great storyteller, but she could do with a better editor. She seem to omit subjects from sentences when two or more sentences have the same subject, which is something I’ve never noticed elsewhere. Her transitions can be strange and her dialogue occasionally unrealistic. In general, the novel’s prose doesn’t have that polished feel which most books published by major publishing houses do. Her grammar is not incorrect, it just doesn’t flow perfectly.
I wouldn’t let that keep me from enjoying the story, though, because Hollick really does have something going here. It’s easy to get emotionally attached to her characters and to really feel for them; she also has the ability to create suspense when the conclusion of the book is already known. I’m looking forward to reading more of her Anglo-Saxon historical fiction, not only because it’s good but because there isn’t enough of it out there.
Andrew Bridgeford takes a deep look at the Bayeux Tapestry, its history, and potential interpretations of its content. He is extremely thorough in his assessment, laying it out in a logical sequence that makes his arguments very persuasive. It’s fairly obvious that he is a lawyer, since he spares no time for fanciful ideas and sticks to interpretations straight from the facts.
The part that I liked most about this was Bridgeford’s extensive use of primary sources. He pulls in plenty of Anglo-Saxon, Norman, and French chronicles, as well as various records and writing of other types. He does occasionally use the work of other historians, but I was very impressed with the depth of his research into the original chronicles. He links the tapestry with various contemporary accounts in an attempt to separate out the true thread of events as well as who may have created or paid for the tapestry and why. He takes an indepth look at various misunderstood aspects of the tapestry and postulates why they are they and what they could possibly mean. He even makes a suggestion as to the author of the Song of Roland.
Bridgeford’s strict use of facts and logic assists the reader in understanding his ideas and are a great support to him. His suggestions never seem implausible, even if they occasionally diverge from orthodox opinion. His footnotes and bibliography are extensive. Definitely a recommended book for anyone interested in 11th century medieval history.
Paul Murray Kendall, the author of this biography of Richard III, one of the most controversial English kings, carefully and painstakingly constructs Richard’s life and times through contemporary fifteenth-century sources, resolutely attempting to thrust away the “Tudor tradition” once and for all.
Necessarily, it takes a long while to get through a volume so heavy with facts and references, especially considering Kendall backs up nearly all of his points with lengthy endnotes. These are welcome and flesh out every aspect of Kendall’s thought processes as he attempts to show us the man who has been so maligned. What emerges is a picture of an honest, well-intentioned man, perhaps too eager to seize a throne, let down by nearly all of his contemporaries. As Duke of Gloucester, Richard won the allegiance of the North, a task which no one had yet managed since William the Conqueror, if not before. He stood by his brother and his brother’s children, for the most part. As King, Richard forgave many of his enemies, bestowed annuities on helpless people, and passed laws entirely for the betterment of society. He did not ask Parliament for a tax despite facing two rebellions, and in general focused largely on increasing the well-being of the poor. He even compares Richard to Henry VII, and Henry comes out the worse for it.
The matter of the Princes in the Tower also comes into play, as do Richard’s motives for dethroning his nephew Edward V. In each case, Kendall addresses the matter logically and with plenty of evidence from the sources he has consulted. Richard comes out of all this possibly guilty, but understandably so, especially in the latter case. Kendall doesn’t believe that Richard killed the princes, and neither do I, though my opinion has been formed for some time now.
Kendall’s writing is at times overly flowery and it’s fairly obvious that this book is over fifty years old. That doesn’t negate its virtues, but it does make for occasionally slow reading, especially compared to current popular biographies. This is very easy to read compared to the original sources, of course. One must also keep in mind that other evidence has been discovered in the years since Kendall’s biography; nevertheless this one remains a cornerstone in the case for Richard III and should be read as such.
I particularly enjoyed the excerpts from Richard’s letters displaying characteristics of his that Kendall wanted to show. I’ve read several medieval biographies at this point and the glimpse into the subjects’ minds is fascinating. Richard’s mind is no less, and it is in these letters that we can feel closest to the king who was betrayed by so many people and even by his own generous policies.
With this biography, Kendall tries, and succeeds, at building a picture of Richard III that is not marred by Tudor legend, a picture of a man and not a monster. He goes through each source and attempts to extract what is true and what is false. I can’t say if he has the whole truth, because I don’t think anyone ever will, but he does a remarkably convincing job.
|
|
Recent Comments