There are far too many examples of women being either pegged as a villain or being omitted from history, entirely (history WAS written by men, as theyThere are far too many examples of women being either pegged as a villain or being omitted from history, entirely (history WAS written by men, as they say!). These ‘men’ (better described as ‘boys’) simply can’t/couldn’t handle an independent, alpha, decisive, complex, literate, warrior, boss babe and had to instead belittle and demean them with propaganda. This is endlessly true in western European history and especially in England. Henrietta Maria, daughter of Italy’s Marie de Medici and King Henry IV of France and Queen consort of England’s King Charles I; was just one of these women. Portrayed as a ‘Popish Brat’ who tried to convert Charles I to Catholicism and thus helped spark the Civil War and the eventual regicide of Charles (so far from the reality of the events); Henrietta Maria is painted with a dark brush. Leanda De Lisle attempts to shed some light on the truth of Henrietta Maria’s personality in, “Henrietta Maria”.
Leanda De Lisle is distinctive for her research and ambitious texts concerning niche pockets of English history or at least fresh perspectives on popular topics. “Henrietta Maria” is no exception and is not a run-of-the-mill biography; instead focusing more Henrietta’s role and impact at the side of King Charles I in hopes of this revealing her true nature and rehabilitating her somewhat poor image. In this way, history tells itself and allows Henrietta to step forward naturally and in an organic way. Unfortunately, the formatting also results in a piece that is absent of the full attention that De Lisle and the title promises with the reader learning more about the time period (Stuart England) than of Henrietta, herself. There are many unanswered questions and “Henrietta Maria” scarcely reveals the ‘real’ Henrietta.
Those readers gravitating towards a floral, visual and illustrative landscape in their history texts will find “Henrietta Maria” satisfying with De Lisle following her usual format of showing her writing chops alongside the history (she would pen a wonderful historical fiction novel, if she chose). “Henrietta Maria” is suspenseful and has a climatic build-up reminiscent of a cinematic plot. Don’t let this fool you into thinking “Henrietta Maria” is biased or fluffy as it is absolutely nothing of the sort and is heavy on the scholarly and factual fronts. It simply means De Lisle is far from dry and slow-moving.
Oftentimes, “Henrietta Maria” does slip on tangents and overly-focuses on details that feel mostly irrelevant to Henrietta Maria. Again, Henrietta is not revealed nearly as much as one would hope and therefore De Lisle overall fails at her target of changing the narrative that is generally pushed. Readers do not walk away from the text with any more of an understanding of Henrietta’s true position than from having read any other piece. This can be argued is because De Lisle tries so hard to not be opinionated within her writing and wants the events to show the real Henrietta but “Henrietta Maria” isn’t as successful as intended.
The majority of “Henrietta Maria” highlights the religious and civic wars during the reign of King Charles that leads to his eventual beheading attempting to showcase Henrietta’s actions during these events. Although some of the complexity and nuances surrounding her are revealed; “Henrietta Maria” more so describes King Charles I and his tragic reign. That being said, De Lisle offers a mountain of previously shrouded and lesser-discussed topics while debunking notable myths that are new even to those who are experts on the subject. Even if Henrietta isn’t the sole focus of De Lisle’s piece; readers will soak up new discoveries in “Henrietta Maria” making it quite notable.
De Lisle occasionally sprinkles in a borderline snarky or comedic line in “Henrietta Maria” but these are not unprofessional lapses in judgment and rather add some sassy finesse to the piece. Somehow, this tactic works even if it wouldn’t for another writer.
The concluding chapters of “Henrietta Maria” appear rushed and missing the opportunity to solidify an emotive understanding of Henrietta. Even at the finality, she feels overlooked and as a side character. This is slightly redeemed in the afterword in which De Lisle summarizes the events of the period through Henrietta Maria’s eyes and explains how they are thusly NOT as made to appear by other written histories. This section is the only time “Henrietta Maria” lives up to its hypothesis and unveils a side of Henrietta unknown. Too bad this is too little, too late.
“Henrietta Maria” includes two sections of photo plates and annotated notes that are particularly gratifying. For instance, there is a comment in the annotated notes in which De Lisle remarks on a point that personally failed to find and encourages readers to inform her of the answer. This is absolutely incredible and shows De Lisle’s inclination to learning and makes her relatable, accessible and interactive with her audience. This is something that should be adopted more often by writers/historians.
Even though “Henrietta Maria” doesn’t meet its aim to fully rehabilitate Henrietta or show an alternate perspective; it does reveal new information within a gripping, readable and well-written narrative even at points where the content is repetitive and somewhat dull. “Henrietta Maria” is not perfect but is still nevertheless suggested for all readers of Stuart England history texts.
I would give “Henrietta Maria” a solid 3½ stars. In lieu of half- stars, the rating has been rounded up to 4 stars. ...more
The Stuart dynasty (starting with James VI of Scotland/James I of England) is widely known for the regicide of King Charles I, the Cromwellian take-ovThe Stuart dynasty (starting with James VI of Scotland/James I of England) is widely known for the regicide of King Charles I, the Cromwellian take-over and the restoration of King Charles II. However, history would have taken quite a different turn entirely; had Henry Frederick, the eldest son of James, lived past the age of 18 to become king. Henry’s life has been overshadowed throughout history with the subsequent events in England but the boy was the pure definition of a worldly leader and deserves to have his light shine. Henry was versed in art, literature, military practice, and architecture; and had an entire court of supporters at his beck and call. Sarah Fraser highlights Henry in, “The Prince Who Would Be King: The Life and Death of Henry Stuart”.
Fraser’s journey with “The Prince Who Would Be King” is highly ambitious in that other full-biographies of Henry are non-existent; running the risk of a flimsy piece. For this same reason, “The Prince Who Would Be King” is also a remarkable, stand-out work. Fraser begins her examination with a focus on the politics surrounding the Jacobean court during Henry’s childhood which admittedly continues the pattern of keeping Henry shrouded from readers; but it effectively introduces who Henry was as an individual. Even taking this angle, Fraser successfully avoids fluff and steers on a clear, concise, scholarly path offering a bounty of compelling material even for those familiar with the time period. Fraser’s writing is vivid, illustrative and inviting; truly grabbing reader attention (chapters are also somewhat on the shorter side making the text accessible and easy-to-read).
Fraser succeeds in not implicating a specific bias or viewpoint although she does occasionally attempt to slip into an overly conversational/familiar verbiage which doesn’t have a proper home in an academic structure. Fortunately, this isn’t excessive and thus: does not bring the downfall of “The Prince Who Would Be King”.
“The Prince Who Would Be King” is strongly founded on first-hand accounts and is heavily detail-oriented to an impressive extent. Readers are transported to the Jacobean court and appear to ‘live’ each event discussed resulting in a vibrant narrative. That being said, Fraser does occasionally delve on tangents and focuses on matters that could be omitted from “The Prince Who Would Be King”. For example, Fraser seems to take a particular obsession to playwrights and masques applying them as though these artistic outputs are historical precedent going as far as an entire chapter on the topic – this can be skimmed.
As expected, “The Prince Who Would Be King” is greatly amplified as Henry ages in years and becomes installed as the Prince of Wales. Readers glean a clear insight into who Henry was and therefore the type of king he would have been to England. At this point, Fraser’s text is highly emotive and readers build a relationship with Henry as he was truly a mind-blowingly impressive lad and it is an utter shame he never reached his majority. Even more of note, the insight into Henry’s life and viewpoints on politics, religion, art and new-world exploration; helps to better understand the macro history of the period and the events to come after Henry’s premature death.
“The Prince Who Would Be King” does leave readers with a few unanswered questions and areas that could have use more elaboration but overall, Fraser’s piece is quire complex and covers sufficient turf.
The concluding chapters of “The Prince Who Would Be King” are explosively gripping when following the illness surrounding Henry’s last days and his death. The tension, loss and mourning is deeply felt by readers and plays out in dramatic detail (Fraser could pen a wonderful historical-fiction novel). Fraser wraps “The Prince Who Would Be King” with a look at the aftermath impact on the figures closest to/working with Henry whom went onward to have a hand in the regicide of his younger brother, King Charles I. This portrait dive actually makes much more sense of the foreboding events resulting in ‘Ah-ha’-moments and leaving “The Prince Who Would Be King” on a memorable note.
Fraser infuses “The Prince Who Would Be King” with two sections of photo plates (both in color and black & white). Unfortunately, the sources list combines primary and secondary sources rather than dividing them and the notes section is not annotated.
Despite small flaws in content and execution; “The King Who Would Be King” is an amazing look at a captivating figure who would have been a history-changing monarch. Readers are both educated entertained regarding Henry’s reveal. “The Prince Who Would Be King” is recommended for all readers interested in the Jacobean court and Stuart dynasty. ...more
The reign of King Charles I in the sixteenth-century England is nothing less than a tragedy ridden with civil war, the dissolution of the monarchy, thThe reign of King Charles I in the sixteenth-century England is nothing less than a tragedy ridden with civil war, the dissolution of the monarchy, the ‘reign’ of Oliver Cromwell, and eventual regicide. What went wrong during this dramatic time? Was Charles a victim or antagonist? Leanda De Lisle attempts to answer these questions among others in, “The White King: Charles I, Traitor, Murderer, Martyr.
Readers expecting a simple biography of Charles I or a portrait of the times will be sorely disappointed in “The White King”. On the other hand, rest assured that De Lisle’s work is a fresh look at the topic rather than a straight-laced history piece. “The White King” eschews a deep, personal look at Charles in order to highlight the intricacies and the events that took place during his reign. De Lisle’s view isn’t biased but is instead well-researched and an encompassing take on all of the individuals and actions involved.
De Lisle does unfortunately, in this vein, have the habit of wandering off on a tangent and also comparing events to that of Tudor England (not necessary). This doesn’t impede the strength of “The White King” but it can occasionally slow the pace.
Noticeably, “The White King” finds its stride as it progresses and becomes more detailed and riveting. De Lisle presents previously unseen manuscripts and is able to showcase new information/material bringing varying angles to even those readers well-versed on the topic. This certainly makes “The White King” standout.
That being said, ‘something’ about De Lisle’s voice feels stifled and held back (even generalized, in some sense). One wants to tell her to just stand her ground and really vibrate. “The White King” reverberates, though, with literary and floral language giving it an occasional narrative feel that makes history entertaining. De Lisle would be very capable of penning an excellent historical fiction piece.
De Lisle’s coverage of the trial and execution of Charles is emotive and induces heightened responses more so than the former sections of “The White King” while maintaining the academic edge. This is certainly the climax of “The White King”.
Unfortunately, after this, the concluding chapter of “The White King” is very one-note and rushed. Even though De Lisle gives a run-down briefing of the lives of figures involved with Charles’s downfall after his death; the wrap-up is compulsory and unsatisfying. De Lisle does redeem this with an afterword exploring the psychological personality of King Charles and some of the qualities that caused his downfall. De Lisle’s arguments are solid and add substance to the piece.
De Lisle supplements “The White King” with some lightly annotated notes and a section of color photo plates which truly stick out – usually the same checklist of photos are used in history texts while De Lisle includes those unseen even by readers heavily focused on the Stuart period.
“The White King” serves as an ample introduction into the tragedy and psychological discourses of the fall of King Charles I. Although not the best book on the market concerning the topic; De Lisle’s is solid, readable, and with an underlying narrative-like entertainment value. “The White King” is suggested for those interested in the topic of seeking an introduction or King Charles I aficionados whom must simply read any and all materials available. ...more
With the majority of English monarchial history focusing on the Tudor dynasty; one can tend to forget about the incredible state of affairs experienceWith the majority of English monarchial history focusing on the Tudor dynasty; one can tend to forget about the incredible state of affairs experienced by the Stuarts. A beheaded king, an exiled prince/future king, Oliver Cromwell, and the English Civil Wars: there was suspense! Intrigue! Romance! Understandably, King Charles II is often times the key figure who receives prime attention; but he did have siblings. Historian Linda Porter focuses her most recent text on the offspring of King Charles I in, “Royal Renegades: the Children of Charles I and the English Civil Wars”.
Having read Porter’s previous works; I was well-aware of her stylistic accents and had an idea of what to expect in “Royal Renegades”. “Royal Renegades” begins with a background look at Charles I and his wife, Queen Henrietta Maria, and quickly sets the stage for what events/actions led up to the English Civil Wars. Porter’s writing is eloquent and dense in academia; yet, has a smooth flow that soaks any chance of the text being dry in terms of readability.
That being said, in usual Porter fashion, her unique thesis is lost in an array of background information and tangents not focusing on the topic at hand. This is great in order to recreate the environment that the Stuart princes and princesses endured but it doesn’t address the aim and title of the book. The focus is so limited that if the pages discussing other topics were removed; “Royal Renegades” would be considerably shorter and probably had not been published at all.
On the bright side, the little information that is offered on the Stuart children is invigorating and fascinating with Porter presenting tidbits that are new even to those readers familiar with the subject. This is supplemented with original document inclusion and full quotes showing Porter’s extensive research.
In the past, Porter has had the habit of including numerous speculative statements in her texts. Luckily, “Royal Renegades” is not a victim of “could have”, “might have”, and “probably” statements. However, Porter does still present many opinions as straight facts without source documentation.
Even though Porter’s floral and illustrative language within “Royal Renegades” is sometimes delectable, it also uses too many words to express a single point akin to a student hoping to reach a certain word-count in a school paper. This results in a void of the material being memorable and ‘sticky’. A more direct approach could have strengthened “Royal Renegades”.
A high point that must be noted is Porter’s examinations of Prince Henry Stuart and Princess Elizabeth Stuart. Although, as aforementioned, “Royal Renegades” hardly mentions the children; when they are – Henry and Elizabeth are brought into the limelight much more than in any other Stuart text.
Porter opts out of discussing the trial of Charles I which comes as a surprise being that she likes to discuss everything and anything. For example, Porter insists on the pattern of, “I mention Person A and now give a mini bio before dropping Person B and a bio. Onwards to Person C and a bio…” This is tedious and ridiculously annoying as it is nothing more than filler material in the overall context of “Royal Renegades”.
The concluding chapters of “Royal Renegades” suffer from multiple flaws: rushed/abrupt content, juvenile blanket statements lacking credibility, and an absence of a summarized ending. The Epilogue attempts to remedy this but it fails to do so and thus closes the text in a less-than-memorable way.
Porter supplements “Royal Renegades” with annotated notes, a bibliography of both primary and secondary sources, and two sections of (black and white) photo color plates.
“Royal Renegades” is a ‘typical’ Porter piece in that it has a unique, captivating thesis but the execution is off-key. Although Porter claims to highlight the children of Charles I; they are hardly mentioned without much information revealed. “Royal Renegades” is basically a text about the English Civil Wars and the political environment that the princes and princesses lived in. “Royal Renegades” is suggested for those readers specifically interested in the Stuarts and who want to read every piece of information regarding the family. Other readers can skip the piece, as it fails to be entirely captivating. ...more
It doesn’t matter who you are or where you live; any child would spend their life avenging those who killed his/her parent. Now, imagine if the parentIt doesn’t matter who you are or where you live; any child would spend their life avenging those who killed his/her parent. Now, imagine if the parent was a king and the child a prince in-line for the throne. This was precisely the scenario with Charles Stuart (King Charles II) and the regicide of his father, King Charles I. Don Jordan and Michael Walsh portrait the punishment and vengeance Charles II sought for those who arranged the beheading of his father in, “The King’s Revenge: Charles II and the Greatest Manhaunt in British History”.
Jordan and Walsh published “The King’s Revenge” a mere five months after “The King’s Bed” (showcasing the intimate life of King Charles II) and more than likely penned it during the same time frame. Yet, “The King’s Revenge” is a step-up from the former work and the authors seemed to abolish some of the issues that were previously present. In “The King’s Revenge”, the co-authors aim to highlight the killing of Charles I, the figures involves, subsequent plots, and the punishments debited out by Charles II once he ascended the throne.
In “The King’s Bed”, it was quite obvious that the authors alternated chapters which lead to an absence of cohesive writing, much choppiness, and repetition. Luckily, this doesn’t seem to be as much of in issue in “The King’s Revenge”. The writing is much smoother, more attentive to the thesis, and appears to have received a proper editing job. Jordan and Walsh successfully combined their voices, making “The King’s Revenge” a stronger piece than expected.
The first ten chapters (slightly shy of the first 200 pages) focuses on the death of Charles I and the plots, machinations, and back-and-forth struggles for political power between Royalists, Rumps, Presbyterians, etc; before Charles II is finally restored to his rightful place on the throne with a scepter in hand. It’s clear that the authors conducted an ample amount of research and the text is truly illuminating and revealing. In fact, “The King’s Revenge” contains many facts and revelations that are new even to those familiar with the topic. There are fewer speculative statements than within the “The King’s Bed” (which was rife with them); making the pages more credible.
Jordan and Walsh’s prose is not overly scholarly and therefore isn’t too dry and, in fact, often has a storytelling narrative which sets the events and environment in a fairly illustrative manner (the authors would be great at penning a historical-fiction piece). This makes “The King’s Revenge” easy-to-read but don’t fret that the pages are dummied down because the work is still academic-enough.
“The King’s Revenge” does run the risk of overwhelming the reader as it showcases a lot of information, happenings, and figures making it slightly difficult to keep track of all of the names of those involved and the events that occurred. Despite this potential roadblock, the reader bypasses this because the material is truly captivating and therefore ‘worth it’.
Once “The King’s Revenge” addresses the actual man haunt and trials of the men guilty of executing Charles I; Jordan and Walsh revert to their clumsy and inconsistent writing style. The content isn’t clear, is jumbled and highly repetitive indicating the alternating authors penning the text. Often times, for example, a figure is discussed – including his jury outcome and punishment meted—and then is discussed again several times afterwards as though he is alive; leaving the reader thinking, “We’ve already been over this”. This noticeably diminishes the value of the “The King’s Revenge” and makes it less compelling and confusing to read.
The concluding chapters highlight the intriguing topic of the flight of some of the regicides including those who lived a life on the run in the New Colonies. Jordan and Walsh present a titillating angle/topic which isn’t regularly discussed elsewhere along with some investigative approaches. However, the authors continue to express jumbled thoughts, jump back-and-forth chronologically, and endorse repetition. Not to mention, the authors employ too many speculative statements and flourishes about emotions or thoughts which are not backed by any credible sources.
If you seek a rushed finality; then you will be pleased with what you find in “The King’s Revenge”. Jordan and Walsh are abrupt and very superficial in their wrapping up of the text. This isn’t meaty or memorable. Luckily, a strong ‘Epilogue’ follows which has a bit of a redeeming quality.
Unlike the delightful appendices in “The King’s Bed”; the two appendices in “The King’s Revenge” (which list the regicides and their fates plus a list of key figures) don’t add any oomph or pizzazz to the text which is disappointing to those readers expecting more. The authors also include ‘Notes’ (not annotated) and a Bibliography. “The King’s Revenge” also includes a section of black-and-white photo plates.
“The King’s Revenge” can certainly be described as a ‘romp’ in the topic of the assignation of Charles I and the punishments of the regicides. However, the text is convoluted, jumbled, repetitive, and ‘messy’ although better in many ways than “The King’s Bed”. It is suggested to read “The King’s Revenge” side-by-side with Killers of the King: The Men Who Dared to Execute Charles I as they work wonderfully together and can answer each others’ questions. “The King’s Revenge” is suggested for Stuart aficionados whom seek to read everything there is about Charles I and II… But, expect a manuscript with faults, confusion, and a rough flow....more
The figure of Prince Rupert of the Rhine often hovers just off the center of Civil War/Restoration-era Stuart England history (almost quite literally The figure of Prince Rupert of the Rhine often hovers just off the center of Civil War/Restoration-era Stuart England history (almost quite literally as Rupert was 6’4” in height which was 9” above the average for that time). Yet, even though his name comes up time and time again; his life story and biography isn’t definitive and has notably been bypassed, in general. Charles Spencer aims to remedy this and introduce the princely nephew of King Charles I in, “Prince Rupert: The Last Cavalier”.
Spencer’s efforts to portray Prince Rupert and bring him the attention he rightfully deserves is somewhat missing its intended target. Rather than be a traditional biography, “Prince Rupert” is more of a political focus with the forefront showcasing military machinations during the civil wars that affected the Stuart family. Spencer’s writing is an academic prose absent with any biases or emotion in the text which can be off-putting for those readers seeking a more narrative feel to their history. “Prince Rupert” can lean towards being described as ‘dry’.
In fact, as a consequence, “Prince Rupert” is often not even really about Rupert at all except for his political role and therefore readers only experience a history recap rather than live with Rupert or get an insight into the man or his psyche. “Prince Rupert” is a fascinating piece if looking to learn about the events of the period but much is absent if hoping for an actual Rupert biography.
On the other hand, “Prince Rupert” is thoroughly researched with the inclusion of several primary-source documents. One can’t accuse Spencer of not having attention-to-detail. Readers even familiar with the subject will learn new facts, gain insight, and experience fresh angles. In this way, some of Rupert’s life does begin to shine, by default.
With all these complaints being said; “Prince Rupert” does, however, encompass a riveting strand with stories and tidbits not discussed elsewhere, a focus on Rupert’s relationship with his brother Prince Maurice, and alternate views to his role in relation to King Charles I and II. All of this material is compelling and worthy of merit therefore adding to layers and the strength of Spencer’s writing.
After “Prince Rupert” hits the 200-page mark, Spencer dives a bit more into the personal factions of Rupert’s life and brings a bit more of the social gossip to the center stage. However, this quickly fades and returns to the overall obsession with the political forays surrounding Rupert. Once again, Spencer does successfully highlight interesting factoids and/or unknown story angles but the main point is that Rupert gets lost in the fray when “Prince Rupert” is supposed to be his book. In this sense, “Prince Rupert” is a weak piece.
The conclusion of “Prince Rupert” is VERY abrupt and best described as ‘passed over’. Spencer describes Rupert’s death as equally nonchalantly as talking about a biscuit. The pages lack any emotional pull or memorable send-off again solidifying that “Prince Rupert” is hardly even about Rupert. Basically, “Prince Rupert” is wrapped-up in a poorly-executed fashion without any heavy meaning.
Spencer supplements “Prince Rupert” with two sections of color photo plates, a ‘Notes’ section (although not annotated), and a list of sources.
“Prince Rupert” is a heavily-researched, credible piece that takes a scholarly look at the environment surrounding Rupert and the Civil War-era of Stuart England. The main downfalls of Spencer’s writing are the dry tone, lack of focus, and the failure to truly highlight the Prince. “Prince Rupert” is not a casual text and is only recommended for those readers highly interested in Rupert and Stuart England....more
There truly were no worse crimes in England’s monarchial history than treason and/or the threat of regicide; especially when this is done in the name There truly were no worse crimes in England’s monarchial history than treason and/or the threat of regicide; especially when this is done in the name of the government and the people. Seventeenth-century England suffered from civil wars, the trial and execution of King Charles I, and the ‘rule’ under Oliver Cromwell as a result of these behaviors. Who were the men single-handedly responsible for this upheaval? What strategies did they take? Charles Spencer portraits the men and events in, “Killers of the King: The Men Who Dared to Execute Charles I”.
Spencer’s “Killers of the King” is a heady, academic piece concentrating on the political and military maneuverings surrounding the cause and effects of the execution of Charles I. Spencer’s prose is scholarly and lacks biases (which is a positive trait); but also is absent in any emotion making “Killers of the King” dry and more of a recap.
“Killers of the King” features and describes a multitude of men which, along with the tone, can certainly overwhelm readers new to the topic or without a heavy interest in the history of this time period. Plus, Spencer sometimes over-describes events and uses too much academic jargon resulting in a bit of an “eyes glazing over”-reaction from the reader.
Despite these criticisms, “Killers of the King” is indeed readable, as it is meticulously researched and has a sort of criminal trial/journalistic feel. Spencer reveals a plethora of information which is often glossed over by other authors and will thus bring illumination and clarity to even those readers with knowledge on the topic. In addition, Spencer offers full quotes from documents and primary sources which helps explain the actions involved in the events with a clear visionary view.
The biggest achievement of Spencer is the organization within “Killers of the King”. Even with the surplus of information presented; the flow is smooth, precise, and makes sense. Although it is a bold statement to make; “Killers of the King” is one of the best compartmentalized writings on the topic.
Halfway through, “Killers of the King” suffers from a problem with consistency. Some areas are richly deep in detail while others are merely overviews of the topics. This leads into tedium of merely explaining the background of each figure involved in Charles’s execution and his eventual fate. The writing style in these chapters doesn’t necessarily make edgy reading (although Spencer does try) and instead reads somewhat like a court report.
The slower pace gains more momentum in the final quarter of the book during which Spencer focuses on the exiled regicides who were hiding out in the New England Colonies. Including tales of wars with Native Americans, hidden compartments in houses, and cave dwellings; the close of “Killers of the King” sounds like the plot to a film and leaves the text on a memorable note.
“Killers of the King” features a section of glossy color plates which supplement the text while sources also suggest further research. However, the notes are not annotated for those who like to fact-check.
Without a doubt, “Killers of the King” highlights a captivating angle and thesis focusing on the men responsible for the execution of King Charles I. The accounts are vivid with details and the personalities beg to be further explored or to become the subjects of historical fiction novels. The major issue, however, with “Killers of the King” is that Spencer seemed to try too hard to be academic which resulted in a dry and somewhat listless piece. Despite this execution flaw; “Killers of the King” is suggested for those readers interested in Stuart England. ...more
Charles Stuart, better known as King Charles I of England and Scotland, holds a monumental role in English history as the first (and only) king to be Charles Stuart, better known as King Charles I of England and Scotland, holds a monumental role in English history as the first (and only) king to be the victim of regicide and convicted (wrongfully) in a court of law as a, “Tyrant, traitor, a murderer and a public enemy to the commonwealth of England” and beheaded as a martyr. Kings have been brutally murdered prior to Charles but never while reigning as King – meaning, they were already usurped and then disposed of or killed while on the battlefield. Charles I was merely a tragic pawn of Oliver Cromwell’s puppets/beliefs and such action resulted in a period of non-monarchical rule before Charles I’s son, the future King Charles II, triumphed and re-claimed the throne for his bloodline. C.V. Wedgwood explores theses hideous events in, “A King Condemned: The Trial and Execution of Charles I”. Note: I read the first-print publication titled simply, “The Trial of Charles I”
“A King Condemned” is a decisive, fresh, unique approach into the regicide of King Charles I eschewing a standard portrait or biography for that of a criminal investigation/exposé analysis in the vein of court reports and documentation. Wedgewood introduces readers to King Charles I with a brief background look at the political breakdown and class divisions that led to civil war, Oliver Cromwell’s rise and the reasoning behind why Charles was put to death. Even without being a super-in-depth foundation; readers garner a better understanding of the events at play and the emotions that were on the rise.
Wedgewood’s attention to detail is riveting and especially impressive as “A King Condemned” was first published in 1964 before the advent of the internet or ease of source accessibility. Wedgwood offers all sides/angles thus procuring a complete macro-view of the fall of Charles I. Yet, Wedgwood is never pushy with opinions/biases and instead of picking sides; the emphasis is placed on the overall heartrending importance of the events. “A King Condemned” is emotive and genuinely shows the history rather than merely re-telling it.
“A King Condemned” is the definition of “fast-paced” which quickens even more when investigating the arrest of Charles I and the subsequent trial. Even though Wedgwood flourishes with demonstrating the suspense that was felt during the time; he doesn’t forget to maintain an academic/scholarly essence by focusing on facts and debunking myths. Few books exist focusing solely on the arrest and trial of King Charles I; so even those readers familiar with the subject will find some juicy morsels of historical significance within the pages of “A King Condemned”.
That being said, readers will have some unanswered questions mostly in the realm of, “Why?”: Why didn’t the common civilians protest/riot against Cromwell in favor of their King? Why didn’t foreign nations start a war backing Charles? Etc. The fact of the matter is that there are no documented answers to these questions and Wedgwood skips assumptions or conjectures (thankfully!) in “A King Condemned”. However, these occasional ‘holes’ do not weaken the text and merely encourage further research, philosophy and assessment.
Although the actual trial coverage feels slightly rushed; the impact is felt and gut-wrenching. The climax of the text is certainly Charles’s preparation to meet his death and the actual beheading. Wedgwood’s imagery is vivid and concise being both entertaining and informative.
Wedgwood concludes “A King Condemned” looking into the after math of the murder (let’s accurately call it what it was); concerning the public and foreign reactions, the resultant political climate and the eventual arrests/imprisonments/deaths of those key figures who brought down the king. This perfectly rounds out “A King Condemned” on a collective and strong note. “A King Condemned” is supplemented with photo plates throughout the text and a ‘light’ bibliography and notes section.
“A King Condemned” is an informative, readable and moving exploration of the criminal regicide and murder of King Charles I. “A King Condemned” is recommended to all readers interested in Stuart England and/or monarchical history/Cromwellian rule. Wedgwood’s “A King Condemned” would be perfect to read in tandem with Charles Spencer’s 2014 text, “Killers of the King: The Men Who Dared to Execute Charles I”. ...more
King Charles I followed the royal penchant for drama to a ‘T’. His reign ushered in a bloody civil war, he was beheaded, and in turn: his family was eKing Charles I followed the royal penchant for drama to a ‘T’. His reign ushered in a bloody civil war, he was beheaded, and in turn: his family was exiled. His wife, Queen Henrietta Maria of France, also lived a high-profile life of twists and turns. Put these two together and the result is quite a remarkable union. Katie Whitaker portrays this marriage in, “A Royal Passion: The Turbulent Marriage of King Charles I of England and Henrietta Maria of France”.
Instead of penning a dual biography on Charles and Henrietta Maria; Whitaker takes a unique angle of focusing on the marriage, itself. The author aims to explore the union’s effects on politics/Charles’s reign and vice versa. Thus, readers should not expect a detailed introduction into the individual lives of each figure and instead prepare to gain insight into Charles and Henrietta as a unit. Fear not though, as Whitaker successfully reveals both Charles and Henrietta which results in the reader truly getting to know them and those in their court.
Whitaker excels at opening this window view due to a heavy usage of primary sources. “A Royal Passion” is chock full of quotes from diaries, letters, and manuscripts which have been buried away under dust but were uncovered by Whitaker; offering new information even to those familiar with the subject. Whitaker compellingly presents these facts while debunking some myths with proper backup and sourcing. Her tone is assertive, academic, and scholarly but is still accessible to the common reader.
“A Royal Passion” is quite the page-turner with a strong pace and a narrative feel which builds suspense and anticipation (Whitaker would be great at procuring a HF novel). Long story short: the piece is well-written and entertaining while being educational. The main annoyance, however, is Whitaker’s excess of starting sentences with “And” and “But”. This is an often repeated thread in books lately and one which is quite annoying.
Some readers may feel that “A Royal Passion” isn’t detailed enough and is too much of an overview. Of course some parts are more in-depth than others. This adds to readability, though, and enough facts are presented to still satisfy without venturing off on tangents. Whitaker is better at staying on topic than many other history writers. It should be noted that there is an issue with a (sometimes) lack of chronology in the retelling which makes some events and chapters choppy.
The median point of “A Royal Passion” highlights more of the religious and civil disruptions in Charles’s reign. This is connected well with the impact on the marriage and conversely, the marriage’s impact on the uprisings versus being simply a historical retelling. In this fashion, Whitaker teaches a dual lesson on these events plus on the personal life of King Charles.
The concluding chapters of “A Royal Passion” are exponentially weaker than the rest of the text. Whitaker rushes to the end, as though she was trying to fit into a committed word count while also being disjointed and ‘jumping’ with the history. The final pages are not as memorable as Whitaker clearly hoped for them to be and therefore, the emotional impact is less than meaty.
“A Royal Passion” includes a section of notes (although not detailed) and a bibliography for the delight of staunch fact-seekers.
Despite an unsatisfying ending; “A Royal Passion” is a unique view into the reign of Charles I and truly invites the reader into his inner domestic life while academically connecting the private with the public politics. Whitaker’s text is well-written, compelling, and entertaining resulting in an exciting history lesson. I look forward to other works from the author. “A Royal Passion” is suggested for all readers interested in Stuart England. ...more
Loading...
