Kris reviewed The Rise and Fall of Anne Boleyn : Family Politics at the Court of Henry VIII on + 7 more book reviews
I'm not going to say I don't recommend this book, because it might not have gotten a fair go. This is my fourth Tudor-era book in a row, and maybe I'm just burnt out. Perhaps I would have preferred this book if I had read it first, rather than last.
The blurbs about this book state that Warnicke sets forth a new and controversial reinterpretation of the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn and focuses on sexual intrigues and family politics.
Maybe I just wasn't up to the challenge, but I was kind of disappointed. I thought it *was* going to be a new and controversial reinterpretation, but I didn't get that impression at all, unless by "reinterpretation" she means that she discredits or relies on sources differently than Ives and Weir do.
For instance, all three authors rank the credibility of the Imperial Ambassador, Eustace Chapuys differently, depending on what he is reporting at the time. I would think this is to be expected and don't see anything "new" or "controversial" about it.
By the time we got to the fall and execution of the Queen, I was pretty much worn out and became bored with her discussion about how the whole thing was due to Anne's delivery of a deformed fetus in January 1536. The rest of her argument regarding the charges against Anne is completely dependent on this one singular event. If the baby was not deformed, then the rest of her argument fails.
It seemed to me that sources she had been discrediting throughout the book were now considered authoritative and accurate when it came to this issue. I am certainly no expert on this historical period -- just eternally fascinated -- but she seemed to be digging pretty deep to come up with facts to support her conclusion.
I had considered that I should read the book again more carefully to see what I had missed, but when I finished it and realized I was relieved to be done with it, I decided against a re-read. I also know that she has written some follow-up articles about her conclusions in this book, and I would have liked to read those, but I was unable to access those publications at a reasonable cost.
But, as I said, I cannot say that I wouldn't recommend the book. These four books -- two by Ives, one by Weir and then this one by Warnicke -- are definitely not summer beach books. You really have to pay attention to follow the arguments, and it's a lot of work. So if I would recommend anything, it would be to separate these with a few along the lines of "Twilight" or "Charlotte's Web" rather than trying to read them one after the other.
The blurbs about this book state that Warnicke sets forth a new and controversial reinterpretation of the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn and focuses on sexual intrigues and family politics.
Maybe I just wasn't up to the challenge, but I was kind of disappointed. I thought it *was* going to be a new and controversial reinterpretation, but I didn't get that impression at all, unless by "reinterpretation" she means that she discredits or relies on sources differently than Ives and Weir do.
For instance, all three authors rank the credibility of the Imperial Ambassador, Eustace Chapuys differently, depending on what he is reporting at the time. I would think this is to be expected and don't see anything "new" or "controversial" about it.
By the time we got to the fall and execution of the Queen, I was pretty much worn out and became bored with her discussion about how the whole thing was due to Anne's delivery of a deformed fetus in January 1536. The rest of her argument regarding the charges against Anne is completely dependent on this one singular event. If the baby was not deformed, then the rest of her argument fails.
It seemed to me that sources she had been discrediting throughout the book were now considered authoritative and accurate when it came to this issue. I am certainly no expert on this historical period -- just eternally fascinated -- but she seemed to be digging pretty deep to come up with facts to support her conclusion.
I had considered that I should read the book again more carefully to see what I had missed, but when I finished it and realized I was relieved to be done with it, I decided against a re-read. I also know that she has written some follow-up articles about her conclusions in this book, and I would have liked to read those, but I was unable to access those publications at a reasonable cost.
But, as I said, I cannot say that I wouldn't recommend the book. These four books -- two by Ives, one by Weir and then this one by Warnicke -- are definitely not summer beach books. You really have to pay attention to follow the arguments, and it's a lot of work. So if I would recommend anything, it would be to separate these with a few along the lines of "Twilight" or "Charlotte's Web" rather than trying to read them one after the other.
